ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Long-term Donor Site-related Quality of Life after Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction.
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. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Donor-site Seroma in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Pooled Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Article
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
Background: Current knowledge about patients' perceptions of the donor site following abdominal-based breast reconstruction and its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) several years after breast reconstruction is limited. This study aimed to assess the long-term effects of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction on HRQoL, specifically focusing on the abdomen and donor site aspects. Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared 66 women who underwent DIEP breast reconstruction between 2000 and 2007 with a matched control cohort of 114 women who underwent therapeutic mastectomies without reconstruction in the year 2005. The DIEP cohort of patients completed the BREAST-Q Reconstruction module during an outpatient visit in 2015-2016. The control cohort completed the same questionnaire online in 2016. Results: The follow-up time was at least 8 years (mean 11.4 ± 1.6 years) postreconstruction for the DIEP cohort and 10 years postmastectomy (mean 11.0 ± 0.3 years) for the control cohort. In the DIEP cohort, 93% reported no donor site pain, 89% had no difficulty sitting up, and 91% had no activity limitations 2 weeks before completing the survey. Patients undergoing DIEP were more satisfied with their abdominal appearance than the control group (adjusted OR, 5.7; 95% confidence interval 1.8-17.6). Conclusions: A decade postoperatively, DIEP breast reconstruction yields high abdominal donor site satisfaction, with comparable abdominal physical well-being to nonreconstructed women.
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.