The BREAST-Q Implant Surveillance Module (BREAST-Q IS) As a Predictor of Breast Implant Revisional Surgery

Abstract Background The Australian Breast Device Registry (ABDR) records breast implant surgeries Australia-wide. In addition to clinical data, the ABDR has collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to better understand patient outcomes following implant surgery. Objectives Our objective was to assess the association between postoperative PROMs and revisional surgery due to complications for reconstructive and cosmetic breast implant patients. Methods A cohort study design was performed. All primary breast augmentation and breast reconstruction implant insertion procedures with 2 years of follow-up after PROM response, and with at least 1 PROM completed between October 30, 2017, and May 16, 2021, registered with the ABDR were identified. The primary outcome investigated was complications requiring revision at 2 years post PROM completion. Binary logistic regression models were applied to assess the predictive ability of PROMs. Results A total of 5321 reconstructive procedures and 25,777 cosmetic breast procedures were followed. Multivariate regression for the reconstructive cohort showed that 3 PROM variables, feel, rippling, and tightness, predicted revision due to complications within 2 years of PROM response (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90, P = .004; OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.87, P < .001; and OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93, P = .003, respectively). Multivariate regression for the cosmetic cohort showed that 3 PROM variables, look, rippling, and tightness, predicted revision due to complications within 2 years of PROM response (OR 0.51, CI 0.42-0.63, P < .001; OR 0.78, CI 0.63-0.95, P = .014; and OR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.94, P = .006, respectively). Conclusions Postoperative PROMs were significantly associated with revisional surgery due to complications. PROMs may be employed to predict the likelihood of complications and revision following breast implant surgery. Level of Evidence: 3 (Therapeutic)

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Aesthetic Surgery Journal
Published
2025-06-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjaf128
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.01
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The BREAST-Q Implant Surveillance Module (BREAST-Q IS) As a Predictor of Breast Implant Revisional Surgery

Susannah Ahern, Arul Earnest, Elisabeth Edström Elder, Michelle Merenda et al.
2 citations
Aesthetic Surgery Journal
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
4.01
article

The BREAST-Q Implant Surveillance Module (BREAST-Q IS) As a Predictor of Breast Implant Revisional Surgery

Susannah Ahern, Arul Earnest, Elisabeth Edström Elder, Michelle Merenda, Rasa Ruseckaite, Patrick Garduce
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background The Australian Breast Device Registry (ABDR) records breast implant surgeries Australia-wide. In addition to clinical data, the ABDR has collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to better understand patient outcomes following implant surgery. Objectives Our objective was to assess the association between postoperative PROMs and revisional surgery due to complications for reconstructive and cosmetic breast implant patients. Methods A cohort study design was performed. All primary breast augmentation and breast reconstruction implant insertion procedures with 2 years of follow-up after PROM response, and with at least 1 PROM completed between October 30, 2017, and May 16, 2021, registered with the ABDR were identified. The primary outcome investigated was complications requiring revision at 2 years post PROM completion. Binary logistic regression models were applied to assess the predictive ability of PROMs. Results A total of 5321 reconstructive procedures and 25,777 cosmetic breast procedures were followed. Multivariate regression for the reconstructive cohort showed that 3 PROM variables, feel, rippling, and tightness, predicted revision due to complications within 2 years of PROM response (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90, P = .004; OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.87, P < .001; and OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93, P = .003, respectively). Multivariate regression for the cosmetic cohort showed that 3 PROM variables, look, rippling, and tightness, predicted revision due to complications within 2 years of PROM response (OR 0.51, CI 0.42-0.63, P < .001; OR 0.78, CI 0.63-0.95, P = .014; and OR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.94, P = .006, respectively). Conclusions Postoperative PROMs were significantly associated with revisional surgery due to complications. PROMs may be employed to predict the likelihood of complications and revision following breast implant surgery. Level of Evidence: 3 (Therapeutic)

Aesthetic Surgery JournalVol. 45(12)
Cancer Institute of New South Wales (AU), Monash University (AU), Australian Catholic University (AU)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Breast Implant and Reconstruction
4.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.