Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35207642›Full record

ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2022

Breast Reconstruction by Exclusive Lipofilling after Total Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: Description of the Technique and Evaluation of Quality of Life.

Alexandre Piffer, Gabrielle Aubry, Claudio Cannistra, Nathalie Popescu, Maryam Nikpayam, Martin Koskas, Catherine Uzan, Jean-Christophe Bichet, Geoffroy Canlorbe

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alexandre PifferDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Gabrielle AubryDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Claudio CannistraDepartment of Gynecology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital Bichat, 75018 Paris, France.
Nathalie PopescuDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Maryam NikpayamDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Martin KoskasDepartment of Gynecology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital Bichat, 75018 Paris, France.
Catherine UzanDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Jean-Christophe BichetDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Geoffroy CanlorbeDepartment of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, 75013 Paris, France.
Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital · FRCentre de Recherche Saint-Antoine · FRHôpital Bichat-Claude-Bernard · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this work was to describe the technique of exclusive lipofilling in breast reconstruction after total mastectomy, to evaluate the satisfaction and quality of life of the patients, and to explore current literature on the subject.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational multicentric study from January 2013 to April 2020. The modalities of surgery, esthetic result, and patient satisfaction were evaluated with the breast reconstruction module of BREAST-Q.

resultsComplete data were available for 37 patients. The mean number of sessions was 2.2 (standard deviation 1.1), spread over an average of 6.8 months (SD 6.9). The average total volume of fat transferred was 566.4 mL. The complication rate was 18.9%. No severe complication was observed (Clavien-Dindo 3/4). Two patients were diagnosed with recurrence, in a metastatic mode (5.4%). The average satisfaction rate was 68.4% (SD 24.8) for psychosocial well-being and 64.5% (SD 24.1) for sexual well-being. The satisfaction rate was 60.2% (SD 20.9) for the image of the reconstructed breast and 82.7% (SD 21.9) for locoregional comfort.

conclusionsBreast reconstruction by exclusive lipofilling after total mastectomy provides satisfactory quality of life scores. The simplicity of the surgical technique and equipment required, and the high satisfaction rate confirm that lipofilling should be included in the panel of choice of breast reconstruction techniques.

Indexed as

breast cancerbreast reconstructionfat graftinglipofillingreconstructive surgery

Identifiers

PMID35207642
PMCPMC8876120
OpenAlexW4210362677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.