Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37534110›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023

Outcomes of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Immediate Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy.

Haris M Akhter, Collin Macdonald, Philip McCarthy, Ye Huang, Bria R Meyer, Valerie K Shostrum, Kerry J Cromer, Perry J Johnson, Shannon L Wong, Heidi H Hon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Haris M AkhterFrom the Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Medicine, Omaha, Nebr.
Collin MacdonaldDivision of Plastic Surgery, Penn State Health, Harrisburg, Pa.
Philip McCarthyDeparent of General Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebr.
Ye HuangFrom the Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Medicine, Omaha, Nebr.
Bria R MeyerDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebr.
Valerie K ShostrumFrom the Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Medicine, Omaha, Nebr.
Kerry J CromerDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebr.
Perry J JohnsonDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebr.
Shannon L WongDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebr.
Heidi H HonDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebr.
University of Nebraska Medical Center · USPennsylvania Department of Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immediate expander/implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy has become more sought after by patients. Although many patients choose this technique due to good aesthetic outcomes, lack of donor site morbidity, and shorter procedure times, it is not without complications. The most reported complications include seroma, infection, hematoma, mastectomy flap necrosis, wound dehiscence, and implant exposure, with an overall complication rate as high as 45%. Closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) has shown value in wound healing and reducing complications; however, the current literature is inconclusive. We aimed to examine if ciNPT improves outcomes for patients receiving this implant-based reconstruction. Methods: This is a retrospective single-institution study evaluating the ciNPT device, 3M Prevena Restor BellaForm, on breast reconstruction patients. The study was performed between July 1, 2019 and October 30, 2020, with 125 patients (232 breasts). Seventy-seven patients (142 breasts) did not receive the ciNPT dressing, and 48 patients (90 breasts) received the ciNPT dressing. Primary outcomes were categorized by major or minor complications. Age, BMI, and final drain removal were summarized using medians and quartiles, and were compared with nonparametric Mann-Whitney test. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher exact test. Results: There was a statistically significant reduction in major complications in the ciNPT group versus the standard dressing group ( Conclusion: Our study shows that ciNPT may help reduce major complication rates in implant-based breast reconstruction patients.

Identifiers

PMID37534110
PMCPMC10393080
OpenAlexW4385445213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.