ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2020
Single-port laparoscopically harvested omental flap for immediate breast reconstruction.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopically Harvested Pedicled Omental Flap in Immediate Unilateral Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques and Clinical Outcomes.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Pooled it
- Benefit of the Omental Flap in Breast Reconstruction for Oncoplastic Treatment: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- A comparative study of quality of life and psychosocial adaptability following modified radical mastectomy and breast reconstruction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Oncoplastic breast reconstruction with single-port laparoscopically harvested omental flap: insights from a ten-year tertiary center experience.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Breast Reconstruction Using Laparoscopically Harvested Pedicled Omental Flap: Imaging Findings and a Case of Recurrence Among Eight Patients.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes of breast reconstruction using omental flaps: A systematic review.JPRAS open · 2024Review
- Laparoscopically harvested omental flap for immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective single-center study of 300 cases.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Current Research on the Use of the Omental Flap in Breast Reconstruction and Post-Mastectomy Lymphedema: A Focus on Omental-Vascularized Lymph Node Transfer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Trends and Innovations in Autologous Breast Reconstruction.Archives of plastic surgery · 2023Article
- Aesthetic Scar-Less Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction.Journal of breast cancer · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImmediate breast reconstruction using laparoscopically harvested omental flap is a safe and feasible technique, providing natural contour and softness to reconstructed breasts with reduced donor-site morbidity and deformity. We report our experience using single-port laparoscopically harvested omental flap (SLOF) for immediate breast reconstruction.
methodsBetween February 2015 and December 2018, 129 patients with malignant neoplasm of the breast underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) or breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by immediate SLOF reconstruction at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. We assessed their clinicopathological data, complications, and cosmetic and oncologic outcomes. Cosmetic outcomes were evaluated by three-panel assessment and the BCCT.core software program.
resultsOne hundred and six (82.2%) underwent NSM and 23 (17.8%) underwent BCS. Mean operation time was 205 (range, 134-316) minutes. Most patients had early-stage disease; 15 (11.6%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Two had malignant phyllodes tumors. Cosmetic outcomes were excellent or good in 96.9% by three-panel assessment and 99.2% by the BCCT.core program with a nearly invisible donor-site scar in the umbilicus. Harvest-associated complications occurred in five (3.9%) patients, including two umbilical wound infections, one intra-abdominal infection, one umbilical hernia, and one pedicle injury. Fat necrosis (13.2%) and epigastric bulging (21.7%) were common mastectomy- or reconstruction-associated complications, but most were mild and some resolved spontaneously. Over a median 38-month follow-up, there were three local, two regional, and three systemic recurrences.
conclusionsSLOF reconstruction is a feasible and safe option for immediate breast reconstruction after NSM or extensive BCS with minimal donor-site morbidity and great cosmetic outcomes.
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.