Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36203096›Full record

ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2023

Immediate Prosthesis Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison Between Ambulatory Surgery Versus Traditional Hospitalization Based on the Propensity Score Matching Method.

Xiao Chen, Aoxiang Chen, Chaoqi Liu, Bin Zhang

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 77% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiao ChenThe First Department of Breast Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, North Huanhu West Road, Sports Institute, Hexi District, Tianjin, China.
Aoxiang ChenThe First Department of Breast Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, North Huanhu West Road, Sports Institute, Hexi District, Tianjin, China.
Chaoqi LiuThe First Department of Breast Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, North Huanhu West Road, Sports Institute, Hexi District, Tianjin, China.
Bin ZhangThe First Department of Breast Cancer, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, North Huanhu West Road, Sports Institute, Hexi District, Tianjin, China. eeflying@163.com.
Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe positive benefits of immediate prosthesis breast reconstruction (IPBR) are incontrovertible. During the COVID-19 pandemic, health care resources became scarce. The implementation of outpatient immediate prosthesis breast reconstruction (OIPBR) can improve the efficiency of medical care and reduce viral exposure. Very few studies have focused on OIPBR and this study aimed to fill this gap by evaluating outcomes of OIPBR compared with traditional hospitalization IPBR (THIPBR) in terms of complications and quality of life. MATERIAL AND

methodsThe study enrolled patients undergoing IPBR at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021. Outcomes were defined as postoperative complications and quality of life before reconstruction and at 3-month follow-up. Quality of life was assessed by BREAST-Q questionnaire. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and propensity score matching (PSM) were applied to adjust for confounders.

resultsA total of 135 patients were enrolled, including 110 with THIPBR and 25 with OIPBR. After matching, baseline characteristics were well balanced. Patients with OIPBR had lower rates of lymphedema on the surgery side (p = 0.041) and readmission (p = 0.040) than patients with THIPBR. No statistically significant differences in the quality of life metrics of psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, satisfaction with breast and physical well-being of the chest were found between the two groups.

conclusionOIPBR is a safe and efficient alternative to THIBPR during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is recommended when medical conditions allow to conserve medical resources. Accelerated technical training for the performance of OIPBR at the hospital level should be expedited. 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

Breast ImplantsBreast NeoplasmsCOVID-19MammaplastyAmbulatory Surgical ProceduresCohort StudiesFemaleHospitalizationHumansPandemicsPropensity ScoreQuality of LifeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAmbulatory surgeryBreast-QComplicationsImmediate prosthesis breast reconstructionPropensity score matching method

Identifiers

PMID36203096
PMCPMC9540132
OpenAlexW4302363632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.