ArticleJournal of breast cancer2020
Article in Journal of breast cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAcellular dermal matrix (ADM) supports tissue expanders or implants in implant-based breast reconstruction. The characteristics of ADM tissue are defined by the manufacturing procedure, such as decellularization, preservation, and sterilization, and are directly related to clinical outcomes. This study aimed to compare the properties of a new pre-hydrated-ADM (H-ADM-low) obtained using a decellularization reagent reduction process with a low concentration of detergent with those of radiation-sterilized H-ADM and freeze-dried ADM (FD-ADM).
methodsADMs were evaluated in terms of structure, mechanical quality, and cytotoxicity using histochemical staining, tensile strength testing, and
resultsThe tissue structure of H-ADM-low (CGDERM ONE-STEP) was similar to that of native skin despite complete decellularization. By contrast, in FD-ADM, the tissue structure was damaged by the freeze-drying process, and radiation-sterilized H-ADM showed a compact fibrillar arrangement. Furthermore, matrix components such as collagen and elastin were preserved in H-ADM-low, whereas a loss of elastin fibers with fragmented distribution was observed in radiation-sterilized H-ADMs. H-ADM-low's tensile strength (58.84 MPa) was significantly greater than that of FD-ADM (38.60 MPa) and comparable with that of radiation-sterilized H-ADMs. The residual detergent content in H-ADM-low (47.45 mg/L) was 2.67-fold lower than that of H-ADM decellularized with a conventional detergent concentration (126.99 mg/mL), and this finding was consistent with the cell viability results (90.7% and 70.7%, respectively), indicating that H-ADM-low has very low cytotoxicity.
conclusionsH-ADM-low produced through aseptic processes retains the original tissue structure, demonstrates excellent mechanical properties, and does not affect cell viability. Therefore, this newer H-ADM is suitable for use in implant-based breast reconstruction.
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.