We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
The Impact of Breast Implant Location on the Risk of Capsular Contraction.
Annals of Plastic Surgery 2016 August
BACKGROUND: Although many theories exist, the etiology of capsular contraction (CC) development is still not known. Anatomic location has been suggested as a possible risk factor, but rates of CC development vary between studies, often with conflicting results. This study examines the risk developing CC with subglandular compared to submuscular placement of the breast implant.
METHODS: A total of 1,283 studies were identified from December 2003 to December 2013 by PUBMED and MEDLINE searches and a manual search strategy. Two levels of screening resulted in 10 studies suitable for meta-analysis, providing data on a total of 17,520 breast implants. All statistical calculations were performed with Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.2.7.
RESULTS: Random-effect (RE) pooled relative risk (RR) and confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for capsular contraction. The risk of developing capsular contraction with subglandular implants was more than 2-fold increased compared to submuscular implants (RE RR 2.18; 95% CI 1.41-3.35; P = 0.0005). The trend was not examined with regards to subfascial placement compared to submuscular or subglandular because more studies are needed to determine this.
CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrated a more than 2-fold increase in the risk of capsular contraction with subglandular compared to submuscular breast implant location.
CLINICAL QUESTION: Risk.
METHODS: A total of 1,283 studies were identified from December 2003 to December 2013 by PUBMED and MEDLINE searches and a manual search strategy. Two levels of screening resulted in 10 studies suitable for meta-analysis, providing data on a total of 17,520 breast implants. All statistical calculations were performed with Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.2.7.
RESULTS: Random-effect (RE) pooled relative risk (RR) and confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for capsular contraction. The risk of developing capsular contraction with subglandular implants was more than 2-fold increased compared to submuscular implants (RE RR 2.18; 95% CI 1.41-3.35; P = 0.0005). The trend was not examined with regards to subfascial placement compared to submuscular or subglandular because more studies are needed to determine this.
CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrated a more than 2-fold increase in the risk of capsular contraction with subglandular compared to submuscular breast implant location.
CLINICAL QUESTION: Risk.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app