Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38213811›Full record

ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2023

Narrative review of patient-reported outcomes of breast reconstruction.

Eric I Chang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Aligning Patient and Surgeon Aesthetic Priorities in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Indian journal of plastic surgery : official publication of the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India · 2026
    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

1 author.

Eric I ChangThe Institute for Advanced Reconstruction, The Plastic Surgery Center, Shrewsbury, NJ, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: The treatment of breast cancer encompasses both the elimination of malignancy as well as reconstruction after tumor extirpation. Although the patient may have had successful treatment of her breast cancer, the resulting disfigurement and deformity can have a substantial impact on her physical and mental well-being. Breast reconstruction affords these patients the opportunity to correct these deformities and potentially to improve their quality of life. The current literature review evaluates patient-reported outcomes for the various options of breast reconstruction that are most commonly performed. Methods: A literature review on PubMed with the key words "patient-reported outcomes", "breast reconstruction", and "breast cancer" yielded 738 results, which were screened. Articles that specifically focused on patient-reported outcomes after various types of breast reconstruction were evaluated and included in this literature review. Key Content and Findings: The main options of alloplastic reconstruction, autologous tissue reconstruction, and oncoplastic reconstruction were reviewed and found to demonstrate high levels of patient satisfaction. Although there is no clear superior option, patient-reported outcomes demonstrate improved well-being compared to no reconstruction. Conclusions: Breast reconstruction provides the opportunity to correct the deformities after breast cancer treatment making it a crucial component of comprehensive cancer care. A variety of reconstructive options are available which can be tailored to each individual patient to achieve the optimal results for that particular patient. Therefore patient-reported outcomes are paramount to gauge the true success of not only breast cancer treatment but also reconstructive aspects after treatment.

Indexed as

autologous tissue breast reconstructionBreast reconstructionimplant reconstructiononcoplastic breast reconstructionpatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID38213811
PMCPMC10777218

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.