ReviewEcancermedicalscience2018
Novel devices for implant-based breast reconstruction: is the use of meshes to support the lower pole justified in terms of benefits? A review of the evidence.
Review in Ecancermedicalscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimal-access Nipple-sparing Mastectomy With Prepectoral Direct-to-implant Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix or Synthetic Mesh.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- The Utility of a Lateral Adipodermal Flap in Prepectoral Direct-to-implant Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Acellular dermal matrix in reconstructive surgery: Applications, benefits, and cost.Frontiers in transplantation · 2023Review
- Chest Feminization in Male-to-Female Transgender Patients: A Review of Options.Transgender health · 2021Review
- In Vitro Characterization of a Novel Human Acellular Dermal Matrix (BellaCell HD) for Breast Reconstruction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Surgical Studies of Reconstructive Breast Surgery - An Overview of the Topics at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Working Group for Reconstructive Surgery in Oncology-Gynecology.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of novel devices such as acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) to support the lower pole in implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBRs) has been described as one of the most important advances in breast reconstructive surgery following mastectomy. However, the majority of outcomes studies focus primarily on providing evidence for the rates of short-term complications associated with their use, as opposed to their reported benefits. Given the high costs associated with using ADMs, together with an increasing number of alternative, cheaper synthetic products entering the market, it is important to clarify whether their use is actually justified and whether the alternative products offer equivalent or superior outcomes. The purpose of this article is to present a comprehensive and updated review of the evidence for the benefits of using different products for lower pole support (LPS) in IBBR compared to reconstructions without. A secondary aim was to determine if there is any evidence to support the use of one product over another.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.