ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Comparison of Secondary Procedures and Complications Between Subpectoral and Prepectoral Direct-to-implant-based Breast Reconstruction: 5-year Retrospective Analysis.
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: Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) remains the most widely used method for breast reconstruction following mastectomy. There is significant variability in the choice between subpectoral and prepectoral approaches. This study compares the frequency of secondary procedures required to improve the aesthetic outcome between subpectoral and prepectoral IBR approaches. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients undergoing single-stage subpectoral IBR between January 2014 and June 2017 or prepectoral IBR between November 2016 and December 2019 by a single surgeon at a tertiary breast unit. The primary outcome was the number of secondary procedures performed within 5 years to improve aesthetic outcomes. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. Results: A total of 388 single-stage IBRs were analyzed (194 subpectoral and 194 prepectoral). Median age was 43.0 years in both groups, with similar body mass index (22.4 kg/m Conclusions: At 5-year follow-up, prepectoral and subpectoral IBR were shown to have comparable rates of secondary aesthetic procedures and postoperative complications. These findings support prepectoral IBR as a safe and effective alternative to subpectoral reconstruction.
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.