ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023
BREAST-Q Patient-reported Outcomes in Different Types of Breast Reconstruction after Fat Grafting.
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. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Essentials for optimizing outcomes in oncoplastic breast reconstruction.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Autologous fat grafting and injectable fillers for post-reconstructive breast remodelling: A systematic review and quantitative synthesis.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- Long-Term Outcome in Implant Breast Reconstruction and Radiotherapy: The Role of Fat Grafting.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Secondary Fat Grafting in Breast Reconstruction: Comparison Between After Autologous Flap and After Silicone Implant.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Deconstructing Fat to Reverse Radiation Induced Soft Tissue Fibrosis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast reconstruction after mastectomy improves patient quality of life. Independently of the type of reconstruction, ancillary procedures are sometimes necessary to improve results. Fat grafting to the breast is a safe procedure with excellent results. We report patient-reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q questionnaire after autologous fat grafting in different types of reconstructed breasts. Methods: We performed a single-center, prospective, comparative study that compared patient-reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q in patients after different types of breast reconstruction (autologous, alloplastic, or after breast conserving) who subsequently had fat grafting. Results: In total, 254 patients were eligible for the study, but only 54 (68 breasts) completed all the stages needed for inclusion. Patient demographic and breast characteristics are described. Median age was 52 years. The mean body mass index was 26.1 ± 3.9. The mean postoperative period at the administration of BREAST-Q questionnaires was 17.6 months. The mean preoperative BREAST-Q was 59.92 ± 17.37, and the mean postoperative score was 74.84 ± 12.48 ( Conclusion: Fat grafting is an ancillary procedure that improves the outcomes in breast reconstruction independently of the reconstruction type and heightens patient satisfaction, and it should be considered an integral part of any reconstruction algorithm.
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.