Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30657111›Full record

ReviewActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2019

Breast reconstruction with breast implants.

Michele Pio Grieco, Francesco Simonacci, Nicolò Bertozzi, Eugenio Grignaffini, Edoardo Raposio

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michele Pio GriecoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Plastic Surgery Division, University of Parma, Parma, Italy Cutaneous, Regenerative, Mininvasive and Plastic Surgery Unit, Parma University Hospital, Italy. dr.mgrieco@yahoo.it.
Francesco Simonacci
Nicolò Bertozzi
Eugenio Grignaffini
Edoardo Raposio
University of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is the most common noncutaneous malignancy among women worldwide. After a breast cancer removal procedure, women are asked to decide about breast reconstruction, mainly to improve their life quality, and they can choose from among many options. Broadly, there are two different types of breast reconstruction procedures: prosthetic implant-based reconstruction and autologous tissue-based reconstruction.

methodsImplant-breast reconstruction is a minimally invasive procedure compared with autologous breast reconstruction. It is associated with fewer short- and long-term complications.

resultsThe ideal candidates for implant-based reconstruction are patients with non-redundant soft tissue coverage, who desire a moderate sized non-ptotic breast and have not been previously irradiated.

conclusionThe state of the art for implant-breast reconstruction is briefly described in this article.

Indexed as

Breast ImplantationBreast ImplantsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansPatient Selection

Identifiers

PMID30657111
PMCPMC6502088
OpenAlexW2908556742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.