ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Outcomes and Complications of Autologous Fat Transfer for Total Breast Reconstruction and Augmentation: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Autologous fat transfer (AFT) for total breast reconstruction and augmentation is increasingly applied due to its advantages over implants and autologous flaps, including minimal invasiveness, minimal donor-site morbidity, and quick recovery. However, AFT is not without complications when applied for full breast reconstruction, underscoring the need to evaluate its safety and effectiveness. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses the oncological and surgical safety of AFT as a stand-alone procedure for total breast reconstruction and augmentation, including the effectiveness of different AFT techniques and patient-reported satisfaction. Methods: A MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science search (from inception to December 2024) focusing solely on randomized controlled trials evaluating AFT outcomes for total breast reconstruction or augmentation was performed. Animal studies, partial reconstruction/augmentation, and combined procedures were excluded. Data were extracted and analyzed using random-effects meta-analyses, following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Results: From 2323 identified articles, 9 randomized controlled trials were included. AFT showed fewer surgical complications compared with implant-based reconstruction. Oncological safety was similar between AFT and implant-based reconstruction. AFT-related complications (eg, oil cysts, fat necrosis) occurred at similar rates across different AFT techniques, but using fat sedimentation and retropectoral grafting were associated with fewer complications. Meta-analysis showed that all enriched AFT techniques-including stromal vascular fraction and botulinum toxin-improved fat retention rates. Conclusions: AFT is an effective and technically and oncologically safe option for total breast reconstruction and total breast augmentation. However, limited follow-up duration prevents definitive conclusions on long-term oncological outcomes.
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.