Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 3:55 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-12 @ 10:48 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT04715802
Status:
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2025-05-14
First Post:
2021-01-10
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Options on the Breast Reconstruction Timing and Method After Removal of Polyacrylamide Hydrogel
Sponsor:
First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Options of Breast Reconstruction Timing and Method After Removing of Polyacrylamide Hydrogel: a Propensity Score-matched Study
Status:
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2025-05
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Since polyacrylamide hydrogel (PAAG) was used in cosmetic surgery in 1997, about 30 million women have received PAAG injection for breast augmentation. Although the use of PAAG has been prohibited in most countries due to its myriad complications, a large number of symptomatic patients and asymptomatic patients have continued to seek medical advice. The strategy of repairing secondary breast deformities after PAAG removal has increasingly become a concern for both doctors and patients, but there is no standardized algorithm yet. The purpose of the present study was to perform a retrospective study to compare the safety and effectiveness of different reconstruction timing and method after removing the gel.
Detailed Description:
The primary purposes of this study are to:
1. Compare the safety and effectiveness of IBR vs DBR after PAAG removal;
2. Compare the safety and effectiveness of breast implants with silicone gel prosthesis vs autologous fat transplantation after PAAG removal;
3. Evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with and rates of complications based on reconstruction timing and type.
The secondary purposes of this study are to：
1. Explore and summarize the characteristics of long-term complications of PAAG injection for breast augmentation;
2. Compare the rate of postoperative complications and reoperations between the patients who had breast reconstruction with implants and patients who had primary breast augmentation with implants.
3. Further refine the algorithm for breast reconstruction in patients with PAAG injections.
1. Compare the safety and effectiveness of IBR vs DBR after PAAG removal;
2. Compare the safety and effectiveness of breast implants with silicone gel prosthesis vs autologous fat transplantation after PAAG removal;
3. Evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with and rates of complications based on reconstruction timing and type.
The secondary purposes of this study are to：
1. Explore and summarize the characteristics of long-term complications of PAAG injection for breast augmentation;
2. Compare the rate of postoperative complications and reoperations between the patients who had breast reconstruction with implants and patients who had primary breast augmentation with implants.
3. Further refine the algorithm for breast reconstruction in patients with PAAG injections.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: