SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Efficacy and Safety of the L-Scar Technique in Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review and 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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond Scar Length: Long-Term Lower Pole Stability in Short-Scar Mammaplasty.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe L-scar technique has emerged as a promising alternative in breast surgery, aiming to reduce visible scarring while preserving aesthetics and minimizing complications. Despite growing clinical interest, comprehensive evaluations of its outcomes remain scarce.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines. Studies were included if they assessed the L-scar technique in breast procedures, including reduction mammaplasty, mastopexy and augmentation, and reported on postoperative complications or patient satisfaction. Searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane through December 2024. Pooled prevalences were calculated using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed via the I
resultsTwelve studies comprising 3,130 patients were included. The pooled incidence of complications was low across most outcomes: breast asymmetry (1.95%), dog-ear deformity (5%), scar hypertrophy (1.7%), wound dehiscence (1.8%), seroma (0.6%), hematoma (1.2%), infection (0.6%), fat necrosis (5.8%), partial nipple areolar complex (NAC) necrosis (0.4%), and no reported cases of complete NAC necrosis. Sensory complications included nipple sensation loss (2.2%) and reduction (20%). Patient satisfaction was high, with a pooled rate of 92%. All estimates include 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was moderate to high for some outcomes, but sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of most estimates.
conclusionsThe L-scar technique demonstrates a favorable safety profile, minimal visible scarring, and excellent satisfaction rates. It appears to be a safe and effective option within the spectrum of contemporary breast reshaping techniques. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate long-term outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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
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.