ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Evaluating Patient-reported Outcomes after Bilateral Reduction Mammoplasty: A Comparison of Reduction Techniques at a University Hospital.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Macromastia, defined as the abnormal enlargement of breasts, burdens individuals physically and psychologically, impacting their daily lives beyond aesthetics. Reduction mammoplasty offers relief by restoring proportional breast volume and appropriate contour. Surgical success relies on choosing a suitable individualized operative technique tailored to the patient's presentation and postoperative goals. This study examines postoperative, patient-reported outcomes across different reduction techniques to gauge the impact of reduction technique on overall patient perspective of aesthetic and functional satisfaction. Methods: A retrospective review identified reduction mammoplasty patients by a single surgeon between 2018 and 2022. Exclusion criteria included augmentation-related or cancer reconstructive procedures. Phone interviews were conducted using a survey adapted from BREAST-Q to assess postoperative outcomes in patients. Data analysis included Pearson chi-square test in STATA 16.1. Results: Among 155 patients identified, 64 completed the survey. Average postsurgical interval was 24 months postoperative. After stratifying patients by operative technique, there was no significant difference in postoperative satisfaction among the cohorts with regard to nipple and breast appearance, sensation, symmetry, or shape. Conclusions: This study highlights no significant disparity in perceived aesthetic or functional outcomes among different reduction mammoplasty techniques. Personalized considerations, such as patient factors, surgical expertise, and anatomical specifics, should guide technique selection, emphasizing individualized approaches over presumed superior methods for optimal results.
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.