Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of the three included studies

From: The impact of cosmetic breast implants on breastfeeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author, year Location Study period Study design Study population Cases Controls Data source Outcomes, NOS Score and LOE rank
Hurst [20] Texas, U.S.A. Lactation support program in a single children’s hospital 1990-1995 Retrospective cohort study 5066 mothers of babies who were admitted or referred (~15% from primary care) to a tertiary children’s hospital lactation program 42 women with implants who attempted breastfeeding 42 women without implants who attempted breastfeeding (matched on year, lactation course, age, parity and breastfeeding experience) Lactation follow-up records, documenting breastfeeding progress weekly during infant’s hospitalization and every other week after discharge (by phone), until 2-3 months postpartum or until breastfeeding ceased Exclusive breast milk feeding or insufficient breastfeeding (defined as little or no lactogenesis or low infant growth with exclusive breastfeeding)
NOS =5
Andrade [18] Brazil, single maternity hospital 2004-2005 Cohort study Women giving birth at the hospital and who attempted breastfeeding 24 women with implants 25 women without implants, selected from same floor as cases Assessment at home Exclusive and nonexclusive breastfeeding at 1 month
NOS =6
Cruz and Korchin [19] Puerto Rico. Presumably a single plastic surgery clinic 12 month period, year not reported Retrospective cohort study 18-40 year old women with small breasts who were evaluated for possible breast augmentation 105 women with saline implants who subsequently had children 107 women who had children prior to evaluation for implants Self-administered questionnaire at initial consultation (controls) or at regular follow-up visit (cases) Attempted breastfeeding; successful breastfeeding for ≥2 weeks, including exclusive and non-exclusive breastfeeding
NOS =4
  1. NOS Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses [12].
  2. LOE National Health and Medical Research Council Level of Evidence Scale [13].