ArticleGland surgery2022
The prognosis outcomes of autologous fat transfer for breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.
Article in Gland surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Autologous fat grafting and injectable fillers for post-reconstructive breast remodelling: A systematic review and quantitative synthesis.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- Enhancing Volume Precision in Breast Reconstruction: A BMI-Based Model for Predicting Flap Weight in Profunda Artery Perforator Flaps.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Radiologic findings in women after Autologous Fat Transfer (AFT) based breast reconstruction: A Systematic Review.JPRAS open · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is a minimally invasive technique that employs a patient's own fat to correct disfiguring sequelae for breast reconstruction in postoperative breast cancer patients. However, the results of studies on this topic were controversial. In order to explore the effect of AFT on breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery, we included cohort studies and conducted a meta-analysis. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies published up to September 14, 2020. We identified the eligible studies based on the PICOS principles, populations (patients diagnosed with breast cancer), interventions (patients undergoing AFT after breast cancer surgery), controls (patients who did not receive AFT after breast cancer surgery), outcomes [local recurrence (LR) rate, regional recurrence (RRR) rate, locoregional recurrence (LRR) rate, distant metastasis rate, systemic recurrence (SR) rate, and total death rate], study design (cohort studies). The I Results: Twenty-two cohort studies involving 9,971 postoperative patients with breast cancer were identified, with 3,622 receiving AFT being the experimental group, and 6,349 not receiving AFT in the control group. The overall quality of the included studies was rated as high. No significant differences in the rate of LR (RR: 0.916, 95% CI: 0.704-1.192), RRR (RR: 1.175, 95% CI: 0.773-1.787), LRR (RR: 0.788, 95% CI: 0.617-1.006), distant metastasis (RR: 1.133, 95% CI: 0.906-1.417), and total deaths (RR: 0.753, 95% CI: 0.539-1.051) were observed between the experimental group and control group (P>0.05). However, the AFT group had a lower rate of SR (RR: 0.671, 95% CI: 0.491-0.915, P=0.012). Conclusions: The AFT group did not increase the rate of LR, RRR, LRR, distant metastasis, and total deaths in postoperative patients, which may indicate that AFT can be performed safely in breast reconstruction after excision of breast tumor.
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.