ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Revision Mastopexy in Aesthetic Breast Surgery.
Review 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing demand for both reconstructive and aesthetic breast surgery has brought renewed attention to the complexities of revision procedures, particularly revision mastopexy. Despite its growing relevance, the literature on this topic remains limited and inconsistently defined. The term "mastopexy" refers to surgical procedures aimed at correcting breast ptosis by repositioning the nipple-areola complex and adjusting breast volume. However, the addition of the term "secondary" introduces ambiguity, encompassing any mastopexy performed after a previous breast surgery-reconstructive or aesthetic. A more precise term, "revision mastopexy," refers specifically to mastopexies following a prior mastopexy, situating the discussion firmly within the aesthetic domain. This review aims to clarify definitions, highlight the challenges unique to revision cases, and address the inconsistencies in terminology and classification that hinder comparative analysis. It also considers the natural aging process of breast tissue, a frequently neglected but critical factor in revision planning. By proposing a clear framework and encouraging the systematic reporting of clinical cases, this work aspires to fill a significant gap in the literature and promote a more cohesive understanding of revision mastopexy. Ultimately, this review seeks to support surgeons in achieving more predictable and refined outcomes in this increasingly common subset of aesthetic breast surgery.Level of Evidence IV 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
41760957What 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.