ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Examining the Value of Ultrasonic Scalpel in Endoscopy-Assisted Transaxillary Breast Augmentation Surgery: A Self-controlled 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
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, some scholars have proposed the usage of ultrasonic scalpel in endoscopic transaxillary breast augmentation to achieve safer and more effective results. In order to compare electric cautery with ultrasonic scalpel on their effectiveness and safety in breast augmentation surgery, we performed a self-control study.
methodsFrom June 2022 to January 2025, a total of 45 cases of transaxillary endoscopic breast augmentation surgery were included in the study. All cases were performed by dual-plane technique. Drainage volume, surgical time, postoperative complications were compared and evaluated on both sides.
resultsThe total postoperative drainage volume in the electric cautery group and the ultrasonic scalpel group was as follows: 268.3±130.0 ml and 274.7±141.7 ml. The average number of drainage days was 4.2±0.9 days. The surgical time for the electric cautery (13.8±2.9 min) was shorter than that for ultrasonic scalpel (15.6±3.4 min). There is no significant difference between the use of electric cautery and ultrasonic scalpel in endoscopic breast augmentation surgery in terms of reducing postoperative bleeding, shortening drainage time, and hospital stay.
conclusionThere are no advantages to perform the endoscopic transaxillary breast augmentation surgery with the usage of ultrasonic scalpel, and even the operation time may be extended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: 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
42223608What 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.