ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023
Using Virtual Reality for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Preoperative Planning.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extended reality for perforator visualization in deep inferior epigastric perforator autologous breast reconstruction: A systematic review.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- The use of extended reality in microsurgical free flap planning - A systematic review.JPRAS open · 2025Review
- Extended reality for mapping perforator-based flaps in breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JPRAS open · 2025Review
- Virtual reality for preoperative patient education: Impact on satisfaction, usability, and burnout from the perspective of new nurses.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Erratum: Using Virtual Reality for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Preoperative Planning: Erratum.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was designed to compare VR stereoscopical three-dimensional (3D) imaging with two-dimensional computed tomography angiography (CTA) images for evaluating the abdominal vascular anatomy before autologous breast reconstruction. Methods: This prospective case series feasibility study was conducted in two tertiary medical centers. Participants were women slated to undergo free transverse rectus abdominis muscle, unilateral or bilateral deep inferior epigastric perforator flap immediate breast reconstruction. Based on a routine CTA, a 3D VR model was generated. Before each procedure, the surgeons examined the CTA and then the VR model. Any new information provided by the VR imaging was submitted to a radiologist for confirmation before surgery. Following each procedure, the surgeons completed a questionnaire comparing the two methods. Results: Thirty women between 34 and 68 years of age were included in the study; except for one, all breast reconstructions were successful. The surgeons ranked VR higher than CTA in terms of better anatomical understanding and operative anatomical findings. In 72.4% of cases, VR models were rated having maximum similarity to reality, with no significant difference between the type of perforator anatomical course or complexity. In more than 70% of the cases, VR was considered to have contributed to determining the surgical approach. In four cases, VR imaging modified the surgical strategy, without any complications. Conclusions: VR imaging was well-accepted by the surgeons who commented on its importance and ease compared with the standard CTA presentation. Further studies are needed to determine whether VR should become an integral part of preoperative deep inferior epigastric perforator surgery planning.
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.