ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2022
Comparison of short-term outcomes between pedicled- and free-flap autologous breast reconstruction: a nationwide inpatient database study in Japan.
Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pedicled versus free flap reconstruction in head and neck surgery: analysis of complications and quality of life.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Association between body mass index and outcomes after autologous breast reconstruction: a nationwide inpatient database study in Japan.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the increasing popularity of autologous breast reconstruction, limited evidence is available. The aim of the present study was to compare the short-term outcomes of pedicled- and free-flap breast reconstructions.
methodsUsing a nationwide Japanese inpatient database, we identified 13,838 patients who underwent breast reconstruction for breast cancer (July 2010-March 2020) using a pedicled or free-flap (pedicled- and free-flap groups, n = 8279 and 5559, respectively). One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the occurrence of postoperative complications, duration of anesthesia, length of stay, and total costs between the two groups. We also performed subgroup analyses stratified by hospital volume.
resultsThe propensity score-matched analysis involving 3524 pairs showed that the pedicled-flap group had significantly lower proportions of takeback (2.1% vs. 3.2%, p < 0.001), thrombosis (0.6% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.001), and postoperative bleeding (2.1% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001) than the free-flap group. No significant differences were found in wound dehiscence or tissue necrosis. Compared to the free-flap group, the pedicled-flap group had a short duration of anesthesia (412 vs. 647 min, p < 0.001) and low total hospitalization costs (12 662 vs. 17 247 US dollars, p < 0.001) but a prolonged postoperative length of stay (13 vs. 12 days, p < 0.001). The subgroup analyses showed results compatible with those of the main analysis.
conclusionsIn this large nationwide cohort of patients who underwent breast reconstruction, pedicled-flap reconstruction was associated with fewer postoperative complications (excluding necrosis and wound dehiscence) and lower hospitalization costs but a longer postoperative length of stay than free-flap reconstruction.
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.