Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42903738›Full record

ReviewJPRAS open2026

Breast augmentation and sensory outcomes: A systematic review of surgical techniques and their impact on nipple-areola complex and breast-skin sensibility.

Elie Ghadban, Cesar Ghadbane, Tigresse Boutros, Mohammad Ali Almokdad, Pietro G di Summa, William Watfa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Elie GhadbanDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Saint George Hospital University Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon.
Cesar GhadbaneFaculty of Medicine and Medical Sciences, University of Balamand, Tripoli, Lebanon.
Tigresse BoutrosSchool of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Holy Spirit University of Kaslik, P.O. Box 446, Jounieh, Lebanon.
Mohammad Ali AlmokdadFaculty of Medicine and Medical Sciences, University of Balamand, Tripoli, Lebanon.
Pietro G di SummaDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, Aesthetic and Hand Surgery, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland.
William WatfaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Saint George Hospital University Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Breast augmentation is among the most frequently performed aesthetic procedures worldwide, offering high satisfaction levels but carrying potential sensory consequences that may affect function and quality of life. Preservation of nipple-areola complex and breast-skin sensation remains a key concern, given its significance for sexual and psychological functions. This systematic review aims to synthesize evidence regarding sensory outcomes following primary cosmetic breast augmentation. Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted for studies published from 2000 to September 2026. Eligible studies included prospective or retrospective clinical investigations evaluating postoperative nipple-areola complex or breast-skin sensibility following primary breast augmentation, using objective measures (e.g., Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments, biothesiometry) or patient-reported outcomes. Non-English articles, reconstructive procedures, and secondary augmentations were excluded. Data were synthesized qualitatively due to the heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures. Results: Twenty-six studies involving 9190 patients were included. Across studies, most sensory alterations were transient, with recovery typically occurring within six to twelve months. Periareolar incisions showed higher rates of early nipple-areola complex hypoesthesia, while inframammary and submuscular or subfascial placements were associated with fewer and milder changes. Implant volume demonstrated a limited but plausible mechanical effect, with larger devices exerting greater tension on superficial sensory branches. Discordance between objective and subjective assessments was noted, reflecting the nipple's unique innervation pattern dominated by deep smooth-muscle fibers rather than superficial mechanoreceptors. Conclusion: Postoperative sensory alterations after breast augmentation are generally mild and reversible. Surgical planning that prioritizes incision placement, pocket selection, and implant dimensions within the anatomical limits of the skin envelope can minimize neural disruption. Future studies should use standardized sensory testing and patient-centered outcome measures to refine evidence-based strategies that preserve both aesthetic and functional integrity.

Indexed as

Breast augmentationBreast sensationImplant planeIncision approachNipple-areola complexSensory change

Identifiers

PMID42903738
PMCPMC13682357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.