ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2022
Comparison of Classic Mastopexy Method with Double-Pedicled Auto-augmentation Mastopexy with Conic-Shaped Modified Inferior Butterfly Flap.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn mastopexy surgery, extra skin and a specific amount of breast tissue are resected. Resected breast tissue is not in a large amount as in reduction surgery. In this study, we have investigated the results of an auto-augmentation mastopexy technique involving use of a superior pedicled mastopexy with conic-shaped inferior butterfly flap for augmentation without implant or fat injection.
methodsA total of 80 patients, 40 patients in each group, were included in the study. In the first group, double-pedicled auto-augmentation mastopexy with conic-shaped modified inferior butterfly flap technique was used. In the second group, conventional superior pedicled wise-pattern mastopexy was utilized. The results were evaluated from photographic measurements performed from standardized preoperative and postoperative lateral photographs.
resultsNo major complications were seen such as partial or total areola necrosis or breast volume loss. None of our patients has made a return with request for revision surgery. Minor complication seen in several patients was resolved with early intervention. The preoperative and postoperative photographic measurements of breast projection, upper pole projection, nipple position and lower pole level from preoperative and postoperative standardized lateral photographs revealed no significant difference between the groups.
conclusionWe obtained highly satisfactory results for our patients. Following the surgery, our patients protected the cup sizes of their bra. In spite of the fact that there was no real augmentation performed in this procedure, effective straightening and the compact breast structure patients that achieved were highly successful in creating an augmented breast image. 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.