ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix and Mesh: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Article 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have evaluated prepectoral implant reconstruction without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) or mesh, and most reported only short-term outcomes. This study, with long-term follow-up, reports the outcomes of prepectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction following mastectomy without the use of ADM or mesh.
methodsPatients who underwent prophylactic or therapeutic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate prepectoral implant reconstruction at our institution between 2018 and 2025 were included. Patients with locally advanced breast cancer or those who underwent tissue expander reconstruction were excluded.
resultsA total of 32 breast reconstructions were performed in 25 patients. The mean age was 39 years, and the median follow-up was 38.5 months. Implant loss occurred in two cases (6.2%), both in smokers. Significant capsular contracture developed in four breasts, all of which had received radiotherapy. Rippling occurred in three cases (9.4%), none requiring intervention. The overall satisfaction rate (very good and good) was 90.6%.
conclusionPrepectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction without ADM or mesh yielded favorable outcomes while being technically simpler and less costly than techniques using those materials. The overall complication rate was acceptable, with excellent results in non-radiated patients. In the radiated group, although capsular contracture occurred in approximately one-third of cases, patient satisfaction remained high. Thus, prior or anticipated radiotherapy should not be considered an absolute contraindication to this approach. 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
41989582What 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.