Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35743534›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Assessment of Patient Satisfaction Using a New Augmented Reality Simulation Software for Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Study.

Simone La Padula, Rosita Pensato, Francesco D'Andrea, Ludovica de Gregorio, Concetta Errico, Umberto Rega, Luigi Canta, Chiara Pizza, Giovanni Roccaro, Raphaelle Billon and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07308275 (Longitudinal Evaluation of Direct Neurotization Technique in Breast Reconstruction With Fully Autologous Components), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT07308275 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Longitudinal Evaluation of Direct Neurotization Technique in Breast Reconstruction With Fully Autologous Components: An Assessment of BREAST-Q Sensation Module, Cutaneous Pressure Threshold, Neuregulin 1 (NRG1) Expression, Nerve Fiber Cross-sectional Area, Intraepidermal Nerve Fiber Density (IENFD), and Breast Morphometry

TypeinterventionalSponsorFakultas Kedokteran Universitas IndonesiaRan2025 to 2027Enrolled28ConditionsBreast Reconstruction After Mastectomy, Neurotization, Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction, Peripheral Nerve RegenerationArmsAutologous Breast Reconstruction With Direct Neurotization, Autologous Breast Reconstruction without Neurotization
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Preoperative 3-dimensional Simulation in Aesthetic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

13 authors.

Simone La PadulaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3543-9024
Rosita PensatoDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Francesco D'AndreaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Ludovica de GregorioDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Concetta ErricoDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Umberto RegaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Luigi CantaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università Degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Napoli, Italy.
Chiara PizzaDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Maxillo facial Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, University Paris XII, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000 Creteil, France.
Giovanni RoccaroDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Maxillo facial Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, University Paris XII, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000 Creteil, France.
Raphaelle BillonDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Maxillo facial Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, University Paris XII, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000 Creteil, France.
Endri DibraDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Maxillo facial Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, University Paris XII, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000 Creteil, France.
Jean Paul MeningaudDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Maxillo facial Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, University Paris XII, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000 Creteil, France.
Barbara HersantDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Maxillo facial Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, University Paris XII, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000 Creteil, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Breast augmentation is one of the most frequently performed plastic surgery procedures. Providing patients with realistic 3D simulations of breast augmentation outcomes is becoming increasingly common. Until recently, such programs were expensive and required significant equipment, training, and office space. New simple user-friendly programs have been developed, but to date there remains a paucity of objective evidence comparing these 3D simulations with post-operative outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess the aesthetic similarity between a pre-operative 3D simulation generated using Arbrea breast simulation software and real post-operative outcomes, with a focus on patient satisfaction. Methods: The authors conducted a prospective study of patients requiring breast augmentation. Patients were asked to assess how realistic the simulation was compared to the one-year post-operative result using the authors’ grading scale for breast augmentation simulation assessment. Patient satisfaction with the simulations was assessed using a satisfaction visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (not at all satisfied) to 10 (very satisfied). Patient satisfaction with the surgical outcome was assessed using the BREAST-Q Augmentation Module. Results: All patients were satisfied with the simulations and with the attained breast volume, with a mean VAS score of 8.2 ± 1.2. The mean simulation time took 90 s on average. The differences between the pre-operative and one-year post-operative values of the three BREAST-Q assessments were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Three-dimensional simulation is becoming increasingly common in pre-operative planning for breast augmentation. The present study aimed to assess the degree of similarity of three-dimensional simulations generated using Arbrea Breast Software and found that the use of the software provided a very satisfying representation for patients undergoing breast augmentation. However, we recommend informing patients that only the volume simulation is extremely accurate. On the other hand, it is necessary to not guarantee an absolute correspondence regarding the breast shape between the simulation and the post-operative result.

Indexed as

3D simulationassessment scaleaugmented realitybreast augmentation outcome assessmentbreast augmentation simulationbreast implantsBREAST-Q

Identifiers

PMID35743534
PMCPMC9225128

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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 Socratic graph.