ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Unveiling Upper-Limb Dysfunction Early After Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Insights from a Retrospective 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrepectoral (PP) breast reconstruction has emerged as a muscle-sparing alternative to the subpectoral (SP) approach. While aesthetic and oncologic outcomes have been well studied, early functional recovery remains less explored.
methodsThis retrospective study assessed upper-limb function in women who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction, comparing direct-to-implant PP and two-stage SP approaches. Outcomes at one month included Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder e Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire, shoulder range of motion (ROM), International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), and Body Image Scale. An exploratory analysis within the PP cohort compared outcomes according to implant coverage materials: acellular dermal matrix (ADM), synthetic mesh, and polyurethane-coated (PU).
resultsAmong 124 patients, 63 underwent PP and 61 SP reconstruction. PP patients reported lower disability (QuickDASH), better body image, and a lower prevalence of pathological shoulder ROM, particularly in internal rotation and flexion. Functional complications, including adherent scars, dysesthesia, lymphosclerosis, implant hypomobility, and pain, were less frequent in the PP group. Furthermore, fewer PP patients required postoperative rehabilitation. In multivariable analysis, only previous upper-limb dysfunction remained independently associated with higher QuickDASH scores. Within the PP group, ADM-and mesh-based reconstructions were associated with more favorable outcomes than PU implants and remained associated with lower disability after adjustment.
conclusionEarly postoperative upper-limb function following implant-based reconstruction is influenced by both reconstructive approach and patient-related factors, e.g., preexisting upper-limb dysfunction. Muscle-sparing strategies may support a more favorable functional outcome in the short term, though this hypothesis must be interpreted cautiously given the retrospective design of our study. 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.