ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023
Analysis of Breast Aesthetic Revision Procedures after Unilateral Abdominal-based Free-flap Breast Reconstruction: A Single-center Experience with 1251 Patients.
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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis on computed tomography angiography mapping for deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Umbilical Inset Incision Type Influences Abdominal Donor Site Healing in Autologous Breast Reconstruction.Microsurgery · 2026Article
- Cosmetic Principles and Contemporary Techniques: Achieving Aesthetic Outcomes in DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Current Trends in Revision Surgery After Breast Reconstruction in China: Insights from a Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- How to approach the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap revision for optimal aesthetics.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Article
- Satisfaction with Breasts following Autologous Reconstruction: Assessing Associated Factors and the Impact of Revisions.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of Mastectomy Flap Necrosis on Patient-Reported Quality-of-Life Measures After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Preliminary Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Microsurgical breast reconstruction in the United States: a narrative review of the current state.Gland surgery · 2024Review
- National trends in revision procedures in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction: Autologous vs implant-based approaches.Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS · 2024Article
- How to Start a Microsurgery Practice: Success and Sustainability in Academic Practice.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although autologous free-flap breast reconstruction is the most durable means of reconstruction, it is unclear how many additional operations are needed to optimize the aesthetic outcome of the reconstructed breast. The present study aimed to determine the average number of elective breast revision procedures performed for aesthetic reasons in patients undergoing unilateral autologous breast reconstruction and to analyze variables associated with undergoing additional procedures. Methods: A retrospective review of all unilateral abdominal-based free-flap breast reconstructions performed from 2000 to 2014 was undertaken at a tertiary academic center. Results: Overall, 1251 patients were included in the analysis. The average number of breast revision procedures was 1.1 ± 0.9, and 903 patients (72.2%) underwent at least one revision procedure. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that younger age, higher body mass index, and prior oncologic surgery on the reconstructed breast were factors associated with increased likelihood of undergoing a revision procedure. The probability of undergoing at least one revision increased by 4% with every 1-unit (kg/m Conclusions: Most patients who undergo unilateral autologous breast reconstruction require at least one additional operation to optimize their breast aesthetic results. Young age and obesity increase the likelihood of undergoing additional operations. These findings can aid reconstructive microsurgeons in counseling patients and establishing patient expectations prior to their undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction.
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.