Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 897

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Paradigm Shift in U.S. Breast Reconstruction: Increasing Implant Rates

Albornoz, Claudia R., Bach, Peter B., Mehrara, Babak J., Disa, Joseph J., Pusic, Andrea L., McCarthy, Colleen M., Cordeiro, Peter G., Matros, Evan·2013·Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite its benefits in body image, self-esteem, sexuality, and quality of life, historically fewer than 25 percent of patients undergo immediate breast reconstruction. After passage of the Women Health and Cancer Rights Act, studies failed to demonstrate changes in reconstructive rates. A recent single-year report suggests significant shifts in U.S. breast reconstruction patterns. The authors' goal was to assess long-term trends in rates and types of immediate reconstruction. METHODS: A serial cross-sectional study of immediate breast reconstruction trends was performed using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 1998 to 2008. Data on mastectomies, reconstructive method (autologous/implant), and sociodemographic/hospital predictors were obtained. RESULTS: Immediate breast reconstruction rates increased on average 5 percent per year, from 20.8 percent to 37.8 percent (p < 0.01). Autologous reconstruction rates were unchanged. Implant use increased by an average of 11 percent per year (p < 0.01), surpassing autologous methods as the leading reconstructive modality after 2002. The strongest predictors of implant use were procedures performed after 2002, bilateral mastectomies, patients operated on in Midwest/West regions, and Medicare recipients. In contrast to bilateral mastectomies, which increased by 17 percent per year (p < 0.01), unilateral mastectomies decreased by 2 percent per year (p < 0.01). Bilateral mastectomy defects had significantly higher reconstruction rates than unilateral counterparts (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The significant rise in immediate reconstruction rates in the United States correlates closely to a 203 percent expansion in implant use. Although the reason for the increase in implant use is multifactorial, changes in mastectomy patterns, such as increased use of bilateral mastectomies, are one important contributor.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/prs.0b013e3182729cde

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 897

Metadata

Authors
Albornoz, C. R., Bach, P. B., Mehrara, B. J., Disa, J. J., Pusic, A. L., McCarthy, C. M., Cordeiro, P. G., & Matros, E.
Venue
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Published
2013-01
Volume
131
Issue
1
Pages
15-23
ISSN
0032-1052 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2321114481
Cited by
897
References
3
FWCI
46.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Paradigm Shift in U.S. Breast Reconstruction: Increasing Implant Rates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/prs.0b013e3182729cde
The paper
Albornoz, C. R., Bach, P. B., Mehrara, B. J., Disa, J. J., Pusic, A. L., McCarthy, C. M., Cordeiro, P. G., & Matros, E. (2013). A Paradigm Shift in U.S. Breast Reconstruction: Increasing Implant Rates. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0b013e3182729cde

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.