ArticleEplasty2021
Surgical and Patient Reported Outcomes After DIEP Breast Reconstruction at a Low-Volume Community Hospital Without Microvascular Fellowship Training.
Article in Eplasty, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- DIEP flap breast reconstruction at a low-volume center: bringing high-quality autologous breast reconstruction to the community.JPRAS open · 2026Article
- Cosmetic Principles and Contemporary Techniques: Achieving Aesthetic Outcomes in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Microsurgical breast reconstruction is typically performed at large, academic centers by fellowship-trained surgeons. This study examines surgical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction at a community hospital by surgeons without fellowship training. Methods: A prospective clinical database and BREAST-Q results were obtained from 33 patients after 45 DIEP flaps performed between 2016 and 2020. PROs and complications were compared to normative data and multi-institutional series. Regression analysis of patient and surgical factors with BREAST-Q scores was performed. Results: Thirty-one patients completed BREAST-Q (response rate = 94%). Overall flap survival was 97.8%. Complications were not statistically different from larger published series ( Conclusion: DIEP flap breast reconstruction can be performed with high quality and excellent PROs at a community hospital by surgeons without microvascular fellowship training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35603019PMC9128728W4285746420What 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.