ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Battle of the Brands: A Multicenter Comparative Analysis of Outcomes in Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction With Acellular Dermal Matrices.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We conducted a head-to-head study comparing outcomes among commonly used implant brands, Allergan, Mentor, and Sientra, used in breast reconstruction. Methods: A multicenter retrospective review of patients undergoing acellular dermal matrix-assisted implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) with Allergan, Mentor, or Sientra implants between January 2014 and July 2022 was conducted. Primary outcomes included rates of return to the operating room for implant removal. Secondary outcomes included complications occurring within 30 days, between 31 and 60 days, and after 60 days. Results: A total of 631 patients (1155 breasts) underwent IBR: Allergan (n = 280 breasts, 24.2%), Mentor (n = 714, 61.7%), Sientra (n = 161, 13.9%). Mean age was 49.2 ± 11.4 years. Mean body mass index was 25.6 ± 5.4 kg/m Conclusions: Low rates of complications among Allergan, Mentor, and Sientra implants in IBR support their continued use. No single brand was superior to others regarding complication profile in our study. Patient characteristics and operative approach seem more predictive of postoperative outcomes than the implant brand alone.
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.