Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Comparison of Aesthetic Results of Mercedes-Y Versus Inverted-V Incision for Umbilical Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. 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
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe appearance and position of navel which are considered as a marker for overall abdominal aesthetics, are important for the final results of abdominal surgeries. However, reconstructing and improving its appearance have been a challenge in plastic surgery. HYPOTHESIS: In this study, we aimed to compare satisfaction of the patients and the plastic surgery professors with the aesthetic results of the two methods of umbilical reconstruction: Mercedes (Y) incision versus inverted-V incision.
methodsThis is a randomized clinical trial performed on umbilicoplasty patients following abdominoplasty, breast reconstruction, or abdominal flap surgery whom referred to our center. They were divided into two equal groups of twenty patients with Mercedes (Y) incision and patients with inverted-V incision. The results of surgery were compared three months after the surgery by the opinions of patients, plastic surgery professors, and unbiased observers.
resultsThe average scores of patients, professors, and observers showed that Mercedes (Y) had significantly higher scores compared to inverted-V incision in terms of position, size, shape, natural appearance, and the overall satisfaction. Surgical complications including stenosis, necrosis, and wound dehiscence were not statistically different in our small sample size.
conclusionIn this study, Mercedes (Y) incision was preferred by all of the groups in all five parameters that were assessed including size, shape, position, natural appearance, and overall satisfaction. The simplicity of the Y incision with less visible scar makes it a suitable method for further investigations with a larger sample size. Level of Evidence I 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 www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
39352502What 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.