Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsCohort StudyPubMed

Mammographic changes after fat transfer to the breast compared with changes after breast reduction: a blinded study.

Rubin JP., Coon D., Zuley M., Toy J., Asano Y., Kurita M.

Cohort Study on Scar, published in Plast Reconstr Surg (2012) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Cohort Study
Journal
Plast Reconstr Surg (2012)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
22261561
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2a8e
Citations
77

Abstract (original English)

: One issue in the adoption of autologous fat transfer to the breast is concern over mammographic changes that may obscure cancer detection. The authors compared mammographic changes following fat grafting to the breast with changes seen after breast reduction. : Twenty-seven women who had normal preoperative mammograms were treated with fat grafting to the breast, including admixing of autologous adipose stem cells with the fat graft, for cosmetic augmentation. Repeated mammograms were performed 12 months after surgery. As a control group, postsurgical mammograms from 23 reduction mammaplasty patients were compared. Eight academic breast imaging radiologists reviewed each mammogram in a blinded fashion. Outcomes analysis accounting for individual radiologist's tendencies was performed using generalized estimating equations. : The average volume of fat injected per patient was 526.5 cc. Fifty mammograms (27 lipotransfer, 23 breast reduction) were assessed. Differences in interpretation among individual radiologists were consistently observed (p < 0.10). Differences in abnormality rates were nonsignificant for oil cysts, benign calcifications, and calcifications warranting biopsy. Scarring (p < 0.001) and masses requiring biopsy (p < 0.001) were more common in the reduction cohort. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System scores were higher after breast reduction (p < 0.001). Si

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
Adipose TissueAdultBreastBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMammaplastyMammographyMiddle AgedTransplantation, Autologous

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research