ArticleJPRAS open2026
Rotation of microtextured anatomical breast implants: A retrospective series of 134 reconstructions.
Article 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anatomically shaped breast implants are widely used in implant-based breast reconstruction because of their ability to restore breast contour and projection. Following regulatory restrictions on macrotextured implants, microtextured anatomical implants have emerged as an alternative. However, concerns remain regarding their positional stability, particularly the risk of implant rotation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent immediate or delayed implant-based breast reconstruction using microtextured anatomical breast implants between December 2020 and October 2025. All procedures were performed by a single experienced plastic surgeon. Implant rotation and postoperative complications were recorded. Outcomes were analysed on a per-patient basis. Results: A total of 134 breast reconstructions were performed in 100 patients, with a mean follow-up of 15.5 months. Four cases of implant rotation occurred in four patients, resulting in an overall rotation rate of 4%. Implant rotation was observed exclusively in revision procedures or during second-stage reconstruction. Three cases were successfully managed by external manipulation, and one required surgical revision. Other complication rates were consistent with those reported in the literature. Conclusion: In this retrospective series, the microtextured anatomical breast implants used in the study, characterized by ultra-low surface roughness, were associated with a low rate of clinically detectable rotation in implant-based breast reconstruction. When combined with meticulous surgical technique and appropriate pocket management, satisfactory positional stability was observed in this cohort.
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.