SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Reverse Expansion Technique for Total Autologous and Hybrid Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionReverse expansion (RE) is an innovative technique that enables the transfer of large volumes of autologous fat in breast reconstruction. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of the RE, comparing hybrid and total autologous approaches.
methodsA systematic search of Web of Science and PubMed identified 3117 records, of which 11 met inclusion criteria. To avoid duplication, the most recent and comprehensive studies from the same groups were analysed. Parameters such as the number of sessions, fat grafting volume, radiotherapy status, and complications were analysed. Comparisons were made between hybrid and total autologous reconstruction groups in terms of the number of fat grafting sessions, fat volume transferred, and complication rates. Additionally, the number of fat grafting sessions was compared between irradiated and non-irradiated patients.
resultsA total of 261 patients undergoing 568 fat grafting sessions were included. Both the mean fat volume transferred per session (288 mL vs. 105 mL) and the total volume per breast (742 mL vs. 228 mL), as well as the number of sessions (2.6 vs. 2), were significantly higher in the total autologous group. Complication rates were lower in total autologous group. Patients who had received radiotherapy required a significantly greater number of fat grafting sessions.
conclusionAlthough the total autologous RE technique required more fat volume and a greater number of sessions to achieve the desired outcome, the overall complication rate is lower. Radiotherapy is associated with an increased number of sessions and a higher-fat-volume requirement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41291078What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.