Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27622100›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2016

Nipple Reconstruction with the Biodesign Nipple Reconstruction Cylinder: A Prospective Clinical Study.

Brendan Collins, Jeremy Z Williams, Heather Karu, Jason P Hodde, Victoria A Martin, Geoffrey C Gurtner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. [Research progress in nipple projection reconstruction based on tissue graft support].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Acellular Biologic Nipple-Areolar Complex Graft:Tissue engineering. Part A · 2020
    Article
  8. Nipple-Areola Complex Reconstruction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brendan CollinsDepartment of Surgery, Mercy Weinberg Women's Hospital, Baltimore, Md.; Park Meadows Cosmetic Surgery, Lone Tree, Colo.; Department of Surgery, Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, S.Dak.; Cook Biotech Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.; and Cook Research Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind.
Jeremy Z WilliamsDepartment of Surgery, Mercy Weinberg Women's Hospital, Baltimore, Md.; Park Meadows Cosmetic Surgery, Lone Tree, Colo.; Department of Surgery, Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, S.Dak.; Cook Biotech Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.; and Cook Research Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind.
Heather KaruDepartment of Surgery, Mercy Weinberg Women's Hospital, Baltimore, Md.; Park Meadows Cosmetic Surgery, Lone Tree, Colo.; Department of Surgery, Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, S.Dak.; Cook Biotech Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.; and Cook Research Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind.
Jason P HoddeDepartment of Surgery, Mercy Weinberg Women's Hospital, Baltimore, Md.; Park Meadows Cosmetic Surgery, Lone Tree, Colo.; Department of Surgery, Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, S.Dak.; Cook Biotech Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.; and Cook Research Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind.
Victoria A MartinDepartment of Surgery, Mercy Weinberg Women's Hospital, Baltimore, Md.; Park Meadows Cosmetic Surgery, Lone Tree, Colo.; Department of Surgery, Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, S.Dak.; Cook Biotech Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.; and Cook Research Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind.
Geoffrey C GurtnerDepartment of Surgery, Mercy Weinberg Women's Hospital, Baltimore, Md.; Park Meadows Cosmetic Surgery, Lone Tree, Colo.; Department of Surgery, Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, S.Dak.; Cook Biotech Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.; and Cook Research Incorporated, West Lafayette, Ind.
Cook Research (United States) · USStanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNipple reconstruction is the last stage in cosmetic reconstruction of the breast after mastectomy, but no method produces reliable and consistent aesthetic results. This study examined the use of the Biodesign Nipple Reconstruction Cylinder (NRC) during reconstruction of the nipple after mastectomy.

methodsPatients with a history of breast cancer and mastectomy desiring nipple reconstruction were invited to participate. After obtaining consent, unilateral or bilateral nipple reconstruction was performed. Skin flaps were raised, the NRC was placed beneath the flaps as a stent, and the site was protected for up to 4 weeks with a nipple shield. Nipple projection was measured for 12 months after surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured and adverse events were recorded. Follow-up examinations were performed at 1 week, and then at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

resultsEighty-two nipple reconstructions were performed in 50 patients. Related postoperative adverse events were minor, but reported in 8 reconstructions (9.8%) representing 7 patients (14.0%). Average projection at 6 and 12 months was 4.1 ± 1.6 mm and 3.8 ± 1.5 mm, respectively, compared with 10.5 ± 2.2 mm 1 week after surgery. Of patients completing the satisfaction questionnaire at 12 months, 70/75 (93.3%) of reconstructions were rated "pleased" or "very pleased" with the overall outcome. Overall, 45/46 (97.8%) patients would recommend nipple reconstruction to other women.

conclusionsThe Biodesign NRC offers a safe alternative to nipple reconstruction, resulting in stable projection and a high level of patient satisfaction for 12 months after placement.

Identifiers

PMID27622100
PMCPMC5010323
OpenAlexW2512864996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.