ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Systematic Review of Patient Satisfaction Following Mastopexy Surgery.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mastopexy is a technique that repositions the nipple-areolar complex to a more aesthetically desirable position within the profile of the breast. The BREAST-Q is a vital tool that can be used to assess patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Given the known importance of PROM following mastopexy surgery, we aim to provide a systematic review of the literature to summarize the available information and provide direction for further optimization of patient care and research. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the Ovid (MEDLINE/PubMed) database in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses checklist. The inclusion criteria comprise studies in the English language from 1976 to 2024, female patients only, and studies reporting patient satisfaction following mastopexy or augmentation mastopexy. Case reports, studies without validated PROMs, animal studies, conference proceedings, and bariatric patients were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Results: A total of 10 studies qualified for qualitative synthesis of data, and meta-analysis was performed where possible. A total of 510 patients underwent mastopexy procedures. The mean ages across studies ranged from 31 to 54 years. Mean body mass index values were reported in 6 studies, ranging from 20 to 27 kg/m². The mean follow-up duration varied from 6 to 38 months. Inconsistent data across all studies significantly limited the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Mastopexy procedure leads to higher rates of patient satisfaction and quality of life. This analysis has highlighted the need for more consistent PROM reporting in mastopexy surgery.
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.