ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Capsule histology in breast reconstruction: different materials lead to different tissue responses - a case series.
Article in Frontiers in 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Implant-based breast reconstruction currently offers a wide range of options due to the availability of different biomaterials; however, their biological impact on the peri-prosthetic tissue environment has not yet been fully clarified. This study aims to comparatively evaluate the tissue responses associated with different implant-tissue interfaces. Methods: Tissue samples obtained from 11 patients who underwent breast reconstruction using various devices were analyzed, including tissue expanders, smooth and textured silicone implants, polyurethane (PU)-coated implants, acellular dermal matrices (ADM), acellular pericardial matrices (APM), and titanised polypropylene meshes (TCPM). Histological analyses performed using hematoxylin-eosin and Masson's trichrome staining evaluated inflammation, collagen organization, neovascularization, and foreign body response. Results: The findings demonstrated distinct tissue responses depending on the implanted material. ADMs were associated with minimal inflammation, organized collagen architecture, and evidence of neovascularization and tissue integration. In contrast, synthetic materials such as TCPM and PU induced chronic inflammation of varying intensity, foreign body granulomatous reactions, extensive fibrosis, and persistence of the material. APMs and both smooth and textured implants showed intermediate patterns, characterized by material persistence and variable chronic inflammatory infiltrates. Smooth implants were associated with more mature, organized, and less cellular fibrous capsules. Discussion: Overall, material composition, structural properties, and interface continuity appear to play a key role in modulating the behavior of the surrounding tissue. These findings indicate that implantable materials are not biologically equivalent and suggest that their selection should take into account not only mechanical aspects but also their biological profile. A better understanding of these interactions may help optimize reconstructive outcomes and reduce long-term complications, such as capsular contracture.
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.