ArticleEcancermedicalscience2024
Chest wall perforator flap partial breast reconstruction: a retrospective analysis of surgical, cosmetic and survival outcome.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of chest wall perforator flaps in reconstruction of upper inner breast defects.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- The anterior intercostal artery perforator flap in immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction: current applications and future perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Chest Wall Perforator Flaps in Partial Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Chest Wall Perforator Flaps in Breast Conservation: Versatile, Affordable, and Scalable: Insights from the Largest Single-Surgeon Audit from India.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Oncoplastic breast surgery includes volume replacement as well as volume displacement. Autologous tissue is the preferred approach for volume replacement and includes chest wall perforator flaps (CWPF). Although described more than a decade ago, CWPFs have not been adopted widely in clinical practice till recently. We report the largest single-centre institutional data on CWPFs. Patients and methods: The study includes all patients who underwent breast conservation surgery (BCS) using CWPFs from January 2015 to December 2022. Data were retrieved from the institutional electronic record and Redcap database. The analysis was done using SPSS 23 and STATA 14. Results: 150 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 48.8 years (SD 10.4), and the body mass index was (26.6 kg/m Conclusion: BCS with CWPF is an excellent option for reconstruction in small to medium-sized breasts. It is associated with minimal morbidity and comparable patient-reported cosmetic and survival outcomes.
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.