Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29926096›Full record

Trial reportJAMA surgery2018

Long-term Patient-Reported Outcomes in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

Katherine B Santosa, Ji Qi, Hyungjin M Kim, Jennifer B Hamill, Edwin G Wilkins, Andrea L Pusic

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07757074 (A National Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study on Delayed Endoscopic Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Via Transaxillary Approach Versus Latissimus Dorsi ± Implant Breast Reconstruction Following Mastectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 197 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
197citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
35.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT07757074 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

A National Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study on Delayed Endoscopic Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Via Transaxillary Approach Versus Latissimus Dorsi ± Implant Breast Reconstruction Following Mastectomy

TypeobservationalSponsorDu ZhengguiRan2026 to 2028Enrolled268ConditionsBreast CancerArmsSurgery options
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

197 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 445 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

137 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Katherine B SantosaSection of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor.
Ji QiSection of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor.
Hyungjin M KimCenter for Statistical Consultation and Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Jennifer B HamillSection of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor.
Edwin G WilkinsSection of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor.
Andrea L PusicPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Michigan Medicine · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcome Consortium (MROC Study)R01CA152192 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI PUSIC, ANDREA LOUISE, WILKINS, EDWIN G. · 2011 to 2015
$4.9M
Molecular Mechanisms of Terminal Schwann Cell Response After Nerve InjuryF32NS098561 · NINDS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI SANTOSA, KATHERINE BERNADETTE · 2016 to 2017
$123k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R01 CA152192NINDS NIH HHS F32 NS098561
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Previous outcome studies comparing implant and autologous breast reconstruction techniques have been limited by short-term follow-up, single-center design, and a lack of rigorous patient-reported outcome data. An understanding of the expected satisfaction and breast-related quality of life associated with each type of procedure is central to the decision-making process. Objective: To determine outcomes reported by patients undergoing postmastectomy breast reconstruction using implant or autologous techniques 2 years after surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients were recruited from 11 centers (57 plastic surgeons) across North America for the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium study, a prospective, multicenter trial, from February 1, 2012, to July 31, 2015. Women undergoing immediate breast reconstruction using implant or autologous tissue reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer treatment or prophylaxis were eligible. Overall, 2013 women (1490 implant and 523 autologous tissue reconstruction) met the inclusion criteria. All patients included in this analysis had 2 years of follow-up. Exposures: Procedure type (ie, implant vs autologous tissue reconstruction). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes of interest were scores on the BREAST-Q, a validated, condition-specific, patient-reported outcome instrument, which were collected prior to and at 2 years after surgery. The following 4 domains of the BREAST-Q reconstruction module were evaluated: satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being, and sexual well-being. Responses from each scale were summed and transformed on a 0 to 100 scale, with higher numbers representing greater satisfaction or quality of life. Results: Of the 2013 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 48.1 [10.5] years for the group that underwent implant-based reconstruction and 51.6 [8.7] years for the group that underwent autologous reconstruction), 1217 (60.5%) completed questionnaires at 2 years after reconstruction. After controlling for baseline patient characteristics, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had greater satisfaction with their breasts (difference, 7.94; 95% CI, 5.68-10.20; P < .001), psychosocial well-being (difference, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.25-5.29; P = .002), and sexual well-being (difference, 5.53; 95% CI, 2.95-8.11; P < .001) at 2 years compared with patients who underwent implant reconstruction. Conclusions and Relevance: At 2 years, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction were more satisfied with their breasts and had greater psychosocial well-being and sexual well-being than did those who underwent implant reconstruction. These findings can inform patients and their clinicians about expected satisfaction and quality of life outcomes of autologous vs implant-based procedures and further support the adoption of shared decision making in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMammaplastyMastectomyMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesQuality of LifeTransplantation, Autologous

Identifiers

PMID29926096
PMCPMC6233781
OpenAlexW2808862172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.