Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies

From: A systematic review and meta-analysis of risks and benefits with breast reduction in the public healthcare system: priorities for further research

Author

Year

Country

Study

design

Study duration (years)

Follow-up (mean number of months)

Study groups;

Intervention and control treatment

Patients (n)

Mean age

(years)

Mean BMI

Smokers (n, %)

Definition of breast hypertrophy

Resection weight, g (mean)

Araujo

2014

Brazil [40]

RCT

(cost-utility)

SD: NR

FU: 6

I: Breast reduction; conventional technique (inverted T-shaped scar and medial pedicle technique in most patients)

C1: No treatment

60

I: 30

C: 30

 BMI >30 excluded)

I:32

C:35.5

(median)

I: 26.4

C: 26.3 (median)

NR

Classification by Sacchini et al

1200

Beraldo

2016

Brazil [41]

RCT

(same RCT as above)

As above

As above

As above

As above

As above

NR

As above

As above

Freire

2007

Brazil [37]

RCT

SD: NR

FU: 6

I: Breast reduction; rigid outlining, transferring to opposite breast, preservation of papillary-areola complex using fatty dermal pedicle. Inverted T-shaped scar

C1: Waiting list for reduction mammaplasty 6 months later

100

I: 50

C: 50

 BMI> 30 excluded)

31.95

25.56

0

NR

1052.19

Neto

2008

Brazil [36]

RCT

(same RCT as above)

SD: 2.08

FU: 6

As above

As above

As above

As above

0

NR

As above

Iwuagwu 2006

UK [39]

RCT

SD: 1.67

FU: 4

I: Bilateral breast reduction with an inferior pedicle

C2: Physiotherapist-instructed upper body exercise 3 times/week while on wait list for surgery

73

I: 36

C: 37

No restriction related to BMI

39.15

28.5

NR

Bra cup size E or more in conjunction with symptoms in the upper body associated with mammary hypertrophy

NR

Iwuagwu 2006

UK [31]

RCT

(same RCT as above)

As above

As above

73

I: 40

C: 73

As above

As above

NR

As above

NR

Saarinemi 2008

Finland [34]

RCT

SD: NR

FU: 6.35

I: Breast reduction

C1: Waiting list

82

I: 40

C: 42

No restriction related to BMI

46.35

29.65

NR

NR

670

Saarinemi 2009

Finland [57]

RCT

(same RCT as above)

As above

As above

As above

As above

As above

NR

NR

As above

Andrade

2018

Brazil [42]

Non-randomized controlled study

SD: 1

FU: 6–12

I: Breast reduction

C1: Waiting list

100

I: 50

C: 50

BMI < 30

I: 33

C: 31 (median)

I: 27

C: 26

(median)

NR

“By the criteria by Sacchini et al. and Franco & Rebello”

1107

Hermans

2005

Netherlands [43]

Non-randomized controlled study

SD: 2

FU: 25.4 (mean, intervention group)

I: Breast reduction, modified Strömbäck procedure with mediocranial pedicle

C1: Waiting list

165

I:94

C:71

BMI < 30

37.3

25.65

NR

Cup size D or above

536

Janik

2019

Poland [62]

Non-randomized controlled study

SD: 0.25 months

FU: 23.56 (mean)

I: Breast reduction

C1: Waiting list

102

I:75

C: 27

38

27.5

24%

NR

NR

Fairchild

2020

USA [32]

Case series

SD: 7

FU: 1

I: Breast reduction

283 (not obese, (BMI < 30);Not included because BMI < 35 not separately reported: 259 (obese, BMI > 30, range 32–38)

17

(median)

26 (median)

NR

NR

NR

Nelson

2014

USA [33]

Case series

SD; 7

FU: 1

I: Breast reduction

2074 (BMI < 30);

1308 (BMI 30–34.9)

NR

NR

10%

NR

NR

Simpson

2019

USA [49]

Case series

SD: 10

FU: 1

I: Breast reduction

8180 (BMI < 30);

4656 (BMI 30.1–35)

NR

(solely reported for total cohort)

NR

(solely reported for total cohort)

NR

NR

NR

Shakespeare

1999

UK [38]

Qualitative

SD: 2,75

FU: 24

I: Breast reduction

110

35

NR

NR

NR

NR

  1. RCT randomised controlled trial, NR not reported, SD study duration, FU follow-up, BMI body mass index, HRQoL health-related quality of life