ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Capsulectomy Following Breast Implant Removal: Evidence-Based Indications and a Framework for Clinical Decision-Making.
Review in Aesthetic plastic 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The question of when capsulectomy is genuinely indicated at the time of breast implant removal has important implications for clinical practice, surgical risk, and patient counselling. This review defines the evidence-based indications for capsulectomy, evaluates the evidence for each of the additional contexts in which it is commonly proposed, and provides a clinical decision framework to assist surgeons in counselling patients and documenting clinical reasoning. No published study directly compares outcomes of explantation with capsulectomy versus explantation alone; the most rigorous prospective data show that explantation without capsulectomy produces symptom improvement statistically indistinguishable from partial or total capsulectomy. The only pre-registered controlled cohort study (n = 9590) found no difference in BII symptom prevalence between women with and without implants, and silicone particle migration to lymph nodes is not reduced by capsulectomy in controlled analyses. The proposed capsular contaminants (biofilm, fungal elements, and heavy metals) have each been examined in controlled tissue analyses; none differentiates symptomatic from asymptomatic patients. A 2024 European expert consensus recommending capsulectomy for macrotextured implants constitutes Level V consensus from a panel composed exclusively of surgeons who perform the procedure. Capsulectomy carries a higher complication rate than explantation alone, and no published evidence documents harm from leaving a capsule in situ after benign explantation. Four indications are supported by the available evidence: confirmed BIA-ALCL, confirmed capsular malignancy, symptomatic capsular calcification with demonstrable mammographic impairment, and Grade III-IV contracture where capsulotomy is insufficient. A clinical decision framework is provided to facilitate evidence-based practice and structured informed consent. Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
42881298What 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.