Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2021
Aesthetic Comparison of Abdominal Donor Site Scar Between Absorbable Dermal Staple and Subcutaneous Suture after Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Randomized Controlled, Double-Blinded Study.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Six Evidence-based Recommendations for Perioperative Incisional Care in Plastic Surgery: A Narrative Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Comparison of Aesthetic Outcomes of Epidermal Staples vs Sutures in Deep Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbdominal tissue transfer has become the most commonly used tool for breast reconstruction. However, a secondary operator is often responsible for donor closure, which leaves dissatisfaction to patients due to inconsistent donor scars. Now, an absorbable dermal stapler is popularized worldwide and currently used for wound closure in many surgical fields. In this study, we aim to evaluate the abdominal donor site scar in using an absorbable dermal staple compared to a conventional suture.
methodsThis is a prospective, randomized controlled and double-blinded study. Between January 2018 and April 2019, a total of 30 patients who underwent breast reconstruction using abdominal flap were included. Donor sites were divided into equal halves, and the each dermal layer was sutured with either dermal staples or traditional suturing, respectively. At 1, 3 and 6 months after operation, the scar was evaluated by two blinded plastic surgeons by using the modified Manchester scar scale (MSS).
resultsAn averaged sum of modified MSS was lower for the side sutured with a dermal stapler at the first month (11.76 ± 2.12 vs. 12.28 ± 2.03, p = 0.097), third month (12.17 ± 1.86 vs. 12.62 ± 2.31, p = 0.301) and sixth month (11.28 ± 2.63 vs. 12.14 ± 2.76, p = 0.051). Also, the dermal stapler side scored significantly higher for patient satisfaction than did the suture side (4.03 ± 0.98 vs 3.66 ± 0.97, p < 0.05).
conclusionThe objective outcome of the scar closed by an absorbable dermal stapler was not statistically superior to conventional suturing. (p > 0.05) In the subjective outcome, however, it showed a significantly higher patients' satisfaction (p < 0.05). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.