A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Autologous fat transfer for breast augmentation: a systematic review. | LitMetric

Autologous fat transfer for breast augmentation: a systematic review.

ANZ J Surg

Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical (ASERNIP-S), Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Published: April 2014

Background: The role of autologous fat transfer (AFT) for cosmetic breast augmentation is uncertain due to ongoing concerns regarding its safety and efficacy compared with other breast augmentation techniques.

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the safety and efficacy of AFT for cosmetic breast augmentation in comparison with saline and cohesive silicone gel implants.

Methods: A systematic search of several electronic databases, including PubMed and EMBASE, was used to identify relevant studies for inclusion. The inclusion of studies was established through the application of a predetermined protocol by two independent reviewers.

Results: There were no comparative studies available, necessitating that all comparisons be indirect. Eighteen studies were included, 11 of which reported outcomes for AFT. Complications associated with AFT occurred in only a small proportion of patients, with fat necrosis, cysts and lumps most commonly reported. No data examining the effect of complications such as microcalcification on long-term mammographic and cancer-related outcomes were identified. Reabsorption of fat occurred to varying degrees, usually during the first 12 months following the procedure. Patient satisfaction following AFT was high. Limitation in breast volume increase was the main complaint associated with this procedure.

Conclusions: Based on the limited evidence available, AFT was considered to be at least as safe as the nominated comparator procedures in regard to complications; however, its safety in regard to cancer detection could not be determined. The efficacy of AFT could not be determined.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ans.12202DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

breast augmentation
16
autologous fat
8
fat transfer
8
systematic review
8
aft cosmetic
8
cosmetic breast
8
safety efficacy
8
efficacy aft
8
aft
7
breast
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!