ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024
Accelerating Fleur-de-lis Panniculectomy with the Absorbable Dermal Stapler-A Study of Efficiency, Aesthetics, and Quality-of-life.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. 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.
- Six Evidence-based Recommendations for Perioperative Incisional Care in Plastic Surgery: A Narrative Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFleur-de-lis panniculectomy (FDL), a contouring technique involving vertical and horizontal tissue resections, often involves longer operative times and potential complications. This study assessed operative time, postoperative outcomes, and patient-reported quality of life (PRO) with Insorb
methodsA retrospective review from 2015 to 2022 of FDL patients excluded those with complex concomitant procedures. Demographics, operative details, and surgical outcomes were compared between patients using the dermal stapler and those with suture-only closures.
resultsForty subjects were identified, with 25 (62.5%) in the dermal stapler cohort. The dermal stapler significantly reduced total procedure time (66.76 vs. 125.33 min, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in surgical site occurrences, aesthetic outcomes, readmissions, or reoperations. Multivariate regression analysis further highlighted the choice of closure technique as an independent predictor of operative time, with traditional sutures indicating a significantly increased operative time compared to using the dermal stapler (AOR 76.53, CI 38.11-114.95, p < 0.001). Regarding PROs, both groups saw improvements across multiple BODY-Q domains, but the dermal stapler group reported greater enhancements (six out of nine domains vs. three for sutures).
conclusionThe absorbable dermal stapler significantly reduces FDL operative time without increasing wound healing or aesthetic dissatisfaction incidents and maintains comparable quality-of-life improvements to standard suture closure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors https://link.springer.com/journal/00266 .
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.