ReviewJPRAS open2026
Impact of donor site on fat graft survival in autologous fat transfer to the breast: A systematic review.
Review in JPRAS 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Autologous fat transfer has gained recognition as total breast reconstruction. Application remains constrained by unpredictable fat graft survival. Donor site selection may influence fat survival, but evidence remains inconsistent and consensus is lacking. This systematic review evaluated the impact of donor site selection on fat graft survival following autologous fat transfer to the breast. Methods: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus were searched up to October 27, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies reporting donor site and graft survival. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I V2. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Results: Seven studies comprising 291 patients were included. Fat was harvested from the abdomen (n=211) or thighs (n=80). No study specifically addressed total breast reconstruction. Pooled mean graft survival was 56.04% (95% CI, 41.57-70.51; Discussion: Although fat graft survival in autologous fat transfer to the breast appears higher when fat is harvested from the abdomen compared to the thighs, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Due to low-quality evidence, time bias and substantial study heterogeneity, no donor site can be recommended based on fat graft survival alone. High-quality, standardized research is needed to clarify the role of donor site in graft survival as such evidence could guide surgical decision-making and improve outcomes in total breast reconstruction.
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.