Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34307092›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of plastic surgery2021

The Journey of Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction through Time.

Sharat Chopra, Zaid Al-Ishaq, Raghavan Vidya

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of plastic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07037576 (Efficacy and Safety of Prepectoral Prosthesis Immediate One-Stage Breast Reconstruction Versus Two-Stage Expander/Prosthesis Reconstruction in Postoperative Adjuvant Radiotherapy Breast Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07037576 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy and Safety of Prepectoral Prosthesis Immediate One-Stage Breast Reconstruction Versus Two-Stage Expander/Prosthesis Reconstruction in Postoperative Adjuvant Radiotherapy Breast Cancer Patients: A Prospective, Single-Center, Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorHenan Cancer HospitalRan2025 to 2028Enrolled104ConditionsBreast Cancer PatientsArmsBreast Reconstruction Surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Poland syndrome combined with breast cancer: a case report.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Sharat ChopraBreast Centre, University Hospital Llandough, Penlan Road, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom.
Zaid Al-IshaqThe Royal Wolverhampton N.H.S. Trust, Wolverhampton Road, Wolverh-ampton United Kingdom.
Raghavan VidyaThe Royal Wolverhampton N.H.S. Trust, Wolverhampton Road, Wolverh-ampton United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe facet of breast reconstruction has evolved from complex surgery to simple implant-based breast reconstruction. Minimal invasive surgery or Prepectoral breast reconstruction has revolutionised the surgical treatment for breast cancer and became a reality due to advances in meshes and implants. In this review, we have looked at the journey of Prepectoral implant beast reconstruction through time.

methodsWe conducted a literature review on pre-pectoral breast reconstruction, emphasising types of cover, its outcomes, complications, and the effect of postmastectomy radiotherapy.

resultsPrepectoral breast reconstruction had advanced with time and appears to be a safe and effective method of breast reconstruction and is associated with minimal morbidity whilst providing adequate cosmesis. Radiotherapy seems to be well tolerated with early favourable results. The Implant loss rates in the Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) to be around 5%-6% and rippling appear to be a common adverse effect of this technique ranging from 0%-35% in various studies.

conclusionPrepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction has emerged as a successful method of breast reconstruction.

Indexed as

Acellular dermal matrixBreastComplicationsPrepectoral reconstructionRadiotherapySynthetic mesh

Identifiers

PMID34307092
PMCPMC8290458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.