ArticleEplasty2011
Dermal perfusion of common donor sites free flaps in chronic smokers and nonsmokers.
Article in Eplasty, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe smoking behavior of the patient influences the indication of plastic surgeon in his reconstruction procedure on the assumption that smoking may increase the complication risks. In the present study, we evaluate the particular aspect of topographic differences in dermal perfusion in chronic smokers and nonsmokers.
methodsThe perfusion parameter of 8 common donor sites for free flap transplantation were investigated in 152 smoking and nonsmoking subjects (n = 152; women: n = 78, 51%; men: n = 74, 49%; smokers: n = 38, 25%; nonsmokers: n = 114, 75%) using the O2C device (LAE Medizintechnik Giessen GmbH, Gießen, Germany). Oxygen saturation (%), relative hemoglobin concentration (AU [arbitrary unit]), Velocity (AU) and Flow (AU) were monitored noninvasively and compared.
resultsAll monitored regions did not show any significant differences in parameters oxygen saturation (smokers = 40%, nonsmokers = 44.5%), relative hemoglobin concentration (smokers = 60 AU, nonsmokers = 60 AU), flow (smokers = 19.5 AU, nonsmokers = 16.5 AU) and velocity (smokers = 10 AU, nonsmokers = 10 AU) between chronic smoking and nonsmoking subjects (P < .05). Also, a distinction between smokers and nonsmokers as a function of gender (women: n = 78, 51%; men: n = 74, 49%) showed no significant differences in all 4 parameters.
conclusionsVaried statements regarding surgical complications in chronic and acute smokers were described in the literature. This raises the question of how far restricting the indication of reconstruction procedure for smoking patients due to higher complications is justified. In our study, there is no significant drop of dermal perfusion parameters after chronic tobacco consumption. Nonetheless, the unfavorable effects of smoking in general to human body and health remain undoubted.
Identifiers
22220217PMC3243457What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.