ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Cumulative Medical Costs of Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction may enhance aesthetic results and improve functional outcomes. Although currently favored over other approaches, the use of acellular dermal matrices may lead to higher healthcare costs compared with the subpectoral approaches. Prior research on the cost implications often lacks comprehensive analyses of cumulative perioperative medical expenses. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from women who underwent unilateral or bilateral mastectomy followed by immediate implant-based reconstruction at a single academic center between July 2017 and June 2022. We used financial data to examine billing charges from the index surgery and the downstream costs of patient care up to 6 months postoperation. Regression analyses assessed total index surgery costs, downstream costs, and cumulative costs while adjusting for variables such as age, body mass index, and racial demographics. Results: The study analyzed data from 86 prepectoral and 99 subpectoral reconstruction patients. Subpectoral reconstructions had significantly lower index surgery costs, including a 30.5% decrease in costs compared with prepectoral reconstruction ( Conclusions: Prepectoral implant-based reconstruction is associated with significantly higher surgical and cumulative costs compared with subpectoral reconstruction. These results provide critical cost-related insights as prepectoral techniques gain traction. Addressing these cost variables could facilitate broader implementation of prepectoral procedures, leveraging their potential patient-centered benefits.
Identifiers
What 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.