Prediction of the Ideal Implant Size Using 3-Dimensional Healthy Breast Volume in Unilateral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. The Ratio of the Resected Specimen Volume to Breast Volume, as Measured by Three-Dimensional Surface Imaging, Is Associated With Aesthetic Outcome After Breast-Conserving Surgery.European journal of breast health · 2026
   Article
2. Prediction model for intraoperative implant volume using the 3D surface imaging system (VECTRA XT 3D) in direct-to-implant breast reconstructions.Gland surgery · 2024
   Article
3. Three-Dimensional Printing in Breast Reconstruction: Current and Promising Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
   Review

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.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as