Public articles linked to the same research event.
Aesthetic Surgery Journal This systematic review searched studies from 2000 to 2025 evaluating aesthetic outcomes after implant-based, autologous, or hybrid breast reconstruction, included 51 studies with 7711 participants from 16 countries, classified assessments as subjective or objective, found subjective tools led by BREAST-Q (35/51, 69%) and objective methods in 19 studies including 3-dimensional surface imaging (8/51, 16%), BCCT.core (7/51, 14%), eye tracking (3/51, 6%), and artificial intelligence-based analyses (3/51, 6%), and noted that no single modality comprehensively addresses all aesthetic domains, with a progressive shift toward multimodal evaluation.
This systematic review searched studies from 2000 to 2025 evaluating aesthetic outcomes after implant-based, autologous, or hybrid breast reconstruction, included 51 studies with 7711 participants from 16 countries, classified assessments as subjective or objective, found subjective tools led by BREAST-Q (35/51, 69%) and objective methods in 19 studies including 3-dimensional surface imaging (8/51, 16%), BCCT.core (7/51, 14%), eye tracking (3/51, 6%), and artificial intelligence-based analyses (3/51, 6%), and noted that no single modality comprehensively addresses all aesthetic domains, with a progressive shift toward multimodal evaluation.
This systematic review searched studies from 2000 to 2025 evaluating aesthetic outcomes after implant-based, autologous, or hybrid breast reconstruction, included 51 studies with 7711 participants from 16 countries, classified assessments as subjective or objective, found subjective tools led by BREAST-Q (35/51, 69%) and objective methods in 19 studies including 3-dimensional surface imaging (8/51, 16%), BCCT.core (7/51, 14%), eye tracking (3/51, 6%), and artificial intelligence-based analyses (3/51, 6%), and noted that no single modality comprehensively addresses all aesthetic domains, with a progressive shift toward multimodal evaluation.
This systematic review searched studies from 2000 to 2025 evaluating aesthetic outcomes after implant-based, autologous, or hybrid breast reconstruction, included 51 studies with 7711 participants from 16 countries, classified assessments as subjective or objective, found subjective tools led by BREAST-Q (35/51, 69%) and objective methods in 19 studies including 3-dimensional surface imaging (8/51, 16%), BCCT.core (7/51, 14%), eye tracking (3/51, 6%), and artificial intelligence-based analyses (3/51, 6%), and noted that no single modality comprehensively addresses all aesthetic domains, with a progressive shift toward multimodal evaluation.