Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35186614›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2022

Development and Evaluation of a Remote Patient Monitoring System in Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

Stefan L M Hummelink, Vera A A Paulus, Eva C Wentink, Dietmar J O Ulrich

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stefan L M HummelinkDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Vera A A PaulusDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Eva C Wentinkimec@Holst Netherlands, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Dietmar J O UlrichDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flap monitoring after a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction is crucial to detect complications in time. A novel and innovative wireless device has been developed and tested in a feasibility study. This study describes our experience with remote patient monitoring via this device in postoperative monitoring of deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps.

methodsFollowing a deep inferior epigastric perforator breast reconstruction, the "Free Flap Patch" was adhered to the flap, continuously measuring temperature and tissue saturation. Data were stored locally on the patch and analyzed in a retrospective manner. Raw analog-digital-conversion values from the red- and infrared sensors, delta muscle saturation (dSmO

resultsNo adverse events related to the device were recorded. One patient suffered flap loss; a decrease in estimated tissue oxygenation was measured with the device in situ. No deviations in clinical variables were recorded in the uncompromised flaps.

conclusionsA wearable patient monitoring device was successfully utilized in clinical practice. In one patient, a flap failure was recorded where the PPG-derived StO

Identifiers

PMID35186614
PMCPMC8849395
OpenAlexW4206723556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.