ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Fat grafting in breast surgery: a retrospective single-breast centre 6-year experience.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn recent years, fat grafting has gained importance as a valuable technique in breast surgery. As a breast center that has embraced this approach, we aimed to investigate the indications and complications of fat grafting.
methodsIn this retrospective study, we examined a total of 263 lipofilling treatments on 121 patients. Five groups were identified: the reconstruction group (72.7%), consisting of 24.8% autologous and 38% implant-based reconstructions after cancer, and correction of the tuberous breasts (10.7%). An almost equivalent group (10.7%), consisted of patients treated for cosmetic reasons. Patients after breast-conserving therapy amounted to 16.5%. Twenty patients (16.5%) were treated to alleviate pain.
resultsNo major complications, and no cancer recurrence or metastasis were observed. One case of infection occurred at the injection site (infection rate: 0.38%). ANOVA showed statistically significant results for age (p < 0.001) and mean fat volume (p = 0.001). Posthoc analysis showed that the mean age of the tuberous group (21 years) was significantly smaller compared to all other categories (p < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis for fat volume indicated that the mean value for the cosmetic category (447.08 cc) was significantly greater than that of the breast-conserving and implant reconstruction categories (p = 0.009 and p = 0.030, respectively), while not significantly different from the tuberous and autologous reconstruction categories (p = 0.928 and p = 0.648, respectively).
conclusionsLipofilling has proven a valuable adjunct in reconstructive and aesthetic breast surgery with a low complication profile. The versatility of this low-cost technique and the low rate of complications make it a powerful asset of modern breast centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39235471What 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.