ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
Clinical use of magnetic resonance imaging in buttock augmentation with silicone implants: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The objective of the current study was to retrospectively examine the morphological magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics of the gluteus maximus of buttock augmentation at levels of predetermined anatomic points. Methods: The present study was a retrospective cross-sectional study. Adult women who underwent high-quality MRI scanning at Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2018 to January 2021 were included in this work. The transverse MRI data measured at the inferior point of the sacroiliac joint, just above the femoral head, and at the ischial tuberosity were collected and statistically analyzed. Results: Fifty-two cases (104 sides of female gluteus maximus) were included in the final analysis. The A point (surgery starting point) were 54.4±6.34 mm, 54.91±5.57 mm, and 73.91±5.57 mm away from the posterior midline at the level of inferior point of the sacroiliac joint, just above the femoral head, and at the ischial tuberosity, respectively. Accordingly, the thickness of the muscle at these locations was 16.0±4.17 mm, 23.4±4.40 mm, and 24.6±7.58 mm, respectively. The diameter of the implant did not exceed 14.18±1.22 cm. In addition, the gluteus maximus at the lowest point of the sacroiliac joint and above the femoral head exhibited an arc structure, which needs to be tilted to the deep plane during separation. Conclusions: Dissimilar from previous experience of blind dissection, the gluteus maximus muscle can be more scientifically and reasonably dissected using the indexes for gluteus augmentation supplied in this study.
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.