ArticleTranslational cancer research2023
Oncologic outcome of breast reconstruction after mastectomy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of breast cancer surgical procedures on postoperative daily life: a multicenter patient-reported outcomes study.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the oncologic outcomes of breast reconstruction (BR) after mastectomy and mastectomy only. This study aimed to analyze the impact of BR on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed using the following keywords: breast cancer, mastectomy, and BR. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting the survival data of patients after mastectomy only and mastectomy with BR. Event-free survival (EFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS) were considered the indicators of oncological outcomes. As all the included studies were non-randomized trials, we used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for risk of bias assessment. The effect of BR on survival was measured using the effect size of the hazard ratio (HR). Data from each study were analyzed using the Review Manager. Results: Fifteen studies with 20,948 cases of BR and 63,358 cases of mastectomy were included. The pooled HRs for EFS and BCSS were 1.07 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-1.47, P=0.65] and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.64-1.11, P=0.22), respectively. The patients who underwent BR after mastectomy had similar EFS and BCSS scores. Furthermore, patients who received BR had better OS (HR =0.73; 95% CI: 0.61-0.88, P=0.001) than those who underwent mastectomy only. Conclusions: The data showed that BR after mastectomy had similar EFS and BCSS and better OS than mastectomy alone. Our meta-analysis suggests that BR is a practicable and safe treatment option for patients with breast cancer.
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.