ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction with Polyurethane-Coated Implants: A 117-Patient Single-Center Study with Objective Cosmetic Evaluation.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrepectoral breast reconstruction with polyurethane (PU)-coated implants has been proposed to enhance implant stability and reduce complications. Evidence regarding their clinical and aesthetic performance remains limited.
methodsA retrospective review was performed on 117 patients (186 breasts) who underwent immediate prepectoral reconstruction with PU-coated implants between 2020 and 2025. Complications were analyzed with univariate and multivariable regression. Aesthetic outcomes were evaluated using BCCT.core software.
resultsAt a median follow-up of 15 months, 34 patients (29.1%) experienced at least one complication, most commonly rippling or upper-pole visibility (16.2%). Implant loss occurred in 3.4% and capsular contracture in 1.7%. Higher BMI, larger implant size, and skin-reducing mastectomy were associated with increased complication risk, although none remained independently significant. Chemotherapy had no measurable impact, and radiotherapy showed only a mild trend toward poorer aesthetic scores. Overall, 81.2% of patients achieved excellent or good BCCT.core results. Younger age and absence of complications were the strongest predictors of favorable aesthetic outcomes.
conclusionsPU-coated implants provided stable outcomes in prepectoral reconstruction, with low implant loss and rare contracture. Most patients achieved favorable cosmetic results without the need for additional reinforcement materials. Higher BMI, larger implants, smoking, and skin-reducing mastectomy increased complication risk primarily in univariate analyses. Prospective multicenter studies with longer follow-up and patient-reported outcomes are required to validate these findings. 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.