ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Comparative Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Autologous Fat Grafting Versus Implant-Based Augmentation in Tuberous Breast Deformity.
Article 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.
- Advancing fat graft survival: from adipose-derived stem cell mechanisms to next-generation regenerative strategies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
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
backgroundTuberous breast (TB) deformity can be corrected with implant augmentation or autologous fat grafting (lipofilling), but comparative patient-reported outcomes are uncertain.
objectivesTo compare postoperative health-related quality of life and satisfaction after lipofilling versus implants in TB correction, hypothesizing better outcomes and fewer complications with lipofilling.
methodsThis is a single-center retrospective cohort of consecutive TB patients treated 2013-2024. Eligible patients underwent implant augmentation with glandular remodeling or exclusive lipofilling by six surgeons. Patient-reported outcomes were collected ≥6 months postoperatively using the postoperative BREAST-Q® Augmentation module (five domains). Complications, number of procedures, and hospital stay were recorded. Group differences used Welch and Chi-square tests (α = 0.05).
resultsOf 53 eligible patients, 40 completed the survey (20 lipofilling; 20 implants). BREAST-Q® domain scores were similar for Satisfaction with Breasts (p = 0.21), Psychosocial Well-being (p = 0.11), and Sexual Well-being (p = 0.34). Lipofilling showed higher Physical Well-being (p < 0.01) and Satisfaction with Outcome (p = 0.01). The mean number of procedures did not differ (1.53 vs. 1.41; p = 0.28). Hospital stay was shorter after lipofilling (1.7 vs. 2.1 days; p < 0.01), and complications were less frequent (p = 0.014).
conclusionsIn this retrospective cohort, lipofilling was associated with higher BREAST-Q® Satisfaction with Outcome and better Physical Well-being, a shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications than implants, without more reinterventions. Prospective adjusted studies with pre-/postoperative BREAST-Q® are warranted. 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
42151607What 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.