ArticleThe British journal of surgery2023
Chest wall perforator flaps for breast reconstruction: international survey on attitudes and training needs.
Article in The British journal of surgery, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chest Wall Perforator Flaps in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Series of 157 Consecutive Cases at the Paris Breast Center.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- National Survey on Attitudes of Brazilian Breast Surgeons Regarding Oncoplastic Surgery: Success of a Training Model.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Chest wall perforator flaps are safe and can decrease mastectomy rates in breast cancer surgery: multicentre cohort study.The British journal of surgery · 2024Article
- Combining Wise-pattern Volume Displacement and Autologous Volume Replacement to Facilitate Oncoplastic Breast Conservation.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- Oncoplastic breast surgery in Europe.Gland surgery · 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
8 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVolume replacement using chest wall perforator flaps (CWPFs) is a promising technique to reduce mastectomy rates without sacrificing function or aesthetics. Owing to limited availability of the technique, only a minority of patients currently have access to CWPF procedures.
methodsAn international web-based survey was disseminated through social media, dedicated webpages, and national and international societies for breast surgery. The survey explored surgeons' attitudes towards CWPFs and their perceived training needs.
resultsOf 619 respondents, 88.4 per cent agreed that CWPF surgery was desirable, with one-third offering it and performing a median of 10 (i.q.r. 5-15) procedures annually. They were more likely to be senior (OR 1.35, 95 per cent c.i. 1.18 to 1.55; P < 0.001), with formal oncoplastic training (OR 4.80, 3.09 to 7.48; P < 0.001), and working in larger units (OR 1.18, 1.03 to 1.35; P = 0.018) with a free-flap (OR 1.62, 1.06 to 2.48; P = 0.025) or CWPF (OR 3.02, 1.87 to 4.89; P < 0.001) service available. In cluster and latent class analysis, none showed high cohesion with performance of CWPF surgery.
conclusionThere is a discrepancy between perceived importance and availability of CWPF surgery, indicating that optimal training is needed.
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.