ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2024
Innervated breast reconstruction: a narrative review of neurotization techniques and outcomes.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Breast Sensation After Abdominal Free Flap Reconstruction With or Without Neurotization: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Striving for higher levels of evidence in sensory restoration in DIEP flap breast reconstruction.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: While significant sensation recovery improvements in neurotized breasts following reconstruction have been reported, sensation testing methods and surgical techniques have been widely variable. This narrative review aims to summarize available literature on current neurotization practices and sensory recovery outcomes in patients undergoing innervated breast reconstruction. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed Medline, Web of Science, and Embase was conducted to identify all studies reporting outcomes of neurotization in breast reconstruction surgeries. Data analyzed included operative times, neurotization techniques, sensory outcomes, and methods as well as patient reported outcomes. Key Content and Findings: Despite the heterogeneity of various studies reviewed, all forms of neurotization achieved earlier and superior sensory recovery throughout the reconstructed breast skin compared to non-innervated breasts. In absence of randomized controlled trials or high-quality comparative studies, further evidence is required to objectively confirm this technique offers better sensory recovery. Conclusions: Neurotization at the time of breast reconstruction may lead to improved sensation and patient reported outcomes delineating improved quality of life compared to non-innervated breasts. Future studies need to standardize the way that breast sensation is measured and determine pre-operative variables leading to expected changes in final sensation recovery to help manage surgical outcome expectations of both the surgeon and the patient.
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.