MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414661388 · doi:10.1007/s44411-025-00354-8

Breast Implants Throughout Time. When Breast Implants Become Safer

2025· article· en· W4414661388 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dominika Mitevová, Martina Chotárová, Filip Čaniga, Martin Boháč

Bibliographic record

VenueBratislavské lekárske listy/Bratislava medical journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Implant and Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniverzita Komenského v Bratislave
KeywordsCapsular contractureImplantSiliconeBreast reconstructionSAFERContractureComplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Breast implants have substantially improved in safety through successive material and surgical innovations. This review outlines how advances in gel cohesivity, viscosity, its cross-linking together with new implant surface technologies have minimized risks such as rupture, biofilm formation, capsular contracture, and implant migration, alongside the rise of surgical techniques (e.g. subfascial and prepectoral placement) that reduce complications and enhance outcomes. Evaluation of the topic A comprehensive analysis of implant generation characteristics collected from articles dating from 1967–2015. The databases used for search included PubMed, publisher platforms (Springer, Elsevier, MDPI), Government health agency sites (FDA, TGA, ANSM, Health Canada) Professional society websites (ISAPS, BAPRAS), Manufacturer websites (Motiva, Mentor, Polytech,…) and device registration databases (FDA PMA, MAUDE, EUDAMED). The article summarizes data from early viscous, low-cohesion silicone implants to modern highly cohesive, biomimetic designs—was conducted. Peer-reviewed studies and registry data were assessed regarding rupture rates, contracture incidence, and migration events. Surgical literature was also reviewed for evidence on technique efficacy and complication rates. Fifth- and sixth-generation implants with high-viscosity, cross-linked silicone gel and multi-layered shells exhibit rupture rates of 1–3% over 5–10 years and capsular contracture rates under 2–3%. Compared to earlier devices, modern surfaces such as nanotexture and smooth microtopography show reduced biofilm-mediated inflammation and migration. Adoption of subfascial and prepectoral surgical approaches—combined with "no-touch" insertion protocols and antibiotic pocket irrigation—correlates with decreased postoperative pain, lower contracture incidence, and fewer revisions. Conclusion Ongoing refinements in implant composition and operative technique have transformed breast augmentation and reconstruction into safer, more individualized procedures. Modern breast implants are associated with markedly fewer mechanical and immunologic complications, while newer surgical placements support faster recovery and durable aesthetic results. These trends align with current evidence-based practice and patient-centered surgical care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBratislavské lekárske listy/Bratislava medical journalSame topicBreast Implant and ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207