Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38580855›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2024

The influence of a previous implant-based breast reconstruction on postoperative sensation of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap.

Joep A F van Rooij, Ennie Bijkerk, René R J W van der Hulst, Stefania M H Tuinder

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2024. 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
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joep A F van RooijDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5066-7909
Ennie BijkerkDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1773-7888
René R J W van der HulstDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3904-118X
Stefania M H TuinderDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands. s.tuinder@mumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9046-3962
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplants and DIEP flaps have different outcomes regarding postoperative breast sensation. When compared to the preoperative healthy breast, implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) negatively influences postoperative breast sensation. However, it is currently unknown whether a prior IBBR also influences postoperative sensation of a replacing DIEP flap. The goal of this cohort study is to evaluate the influence of an IBBR on the postoperative sensation of a replacing DIEP flap.

methodsWomen were included if they received a DIEP flap reconstruction after mastectomy, with or without prior tissue expander (TE) and/or definitive breast implant. Sensation was measured at four intervals in 9 areas of the breast with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments: T0 (preoperative, implant/no reconstruction), T1 (2-7 months postoperative, DIEP), T2 (± 12 months postoperative, DIEP), Tmax (maximum follow-up, DIEP). Linear mixed-effects models were used to investigate the relationship between an implant/TE prior to the DIEP flap and recovery of breast sensation.

results142 women comprising 206 breasts were included. 48 (23.3%) breasts did, and 158 (76.7%) breasts did not have a TE/IBBR prior to their DIEP. No statistically significant or clinically relevant relationships were found between a prior implant/TE and recovery of DIEP flap breast sensation for the flap skin, native skin, or total breast skin at T1, T2, or Tmax. There were also no relationships found after adjustment for the confounders radiation therapy, BMI, diabetes, age, flap weight, follow-up, and nerve coaptation.

conclusionsAn implant/TE prior to a DIEP flap does not influence the recovery of postoperative breast sensation of the DIEP flap.

Indexed as

Breast ImplantsBreast NeoplasmsEpigastric ArteriesMammaplastyPerforator FlapSensationAdultAgedBreastBreast ImplantationFemaleHumansMastectomyMiddle AgedPostoperative PeriodBreast implantsBreast reconstructionBreast sensationDIEP flapImplant-based breast reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID38580855
PMCPMC11045600
OpenAlexW4394012333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.