ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Real-world data of perioperative complications in prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: a prospective cohort study.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze complications and potential risk factors associated with immediate prepectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DTIBR).
methods295 patients (326 operated breasts) with DTIBR between March 2021 and December 2023 were included in this prospective study. Postoperative complications (postoperative bleeding, seroma, infection, necrosis, wound dehiscence, implant exchange/loss) were analyzed for potential risk factors by descriptive and logistic regression analyses.
resultsThe implant was covered by TiLOOP® Bra Pocket in 227 breasts (69.6%), by "dual-plane" technique in 20 breasts (6.1%), by acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in 1 breast (0.3%). No additional support was used for 78 breasts (23.9%). The use of mesh did not increase the risk for complications. Major complications requiring surgical revision occurred due to postoperative bleeding in 22 (6.7%), seroma in 2 (0.6%), infection in 13 (4.0%), necrosis in 10 (3.1%), and wound dehiscence in 10 (3.1%) breasts. Thirteen (4.0%) implants were exchanged, and 5 (1.5%) were explanted without substitution. One patient had to switch to autologous reconstruction due to skin necrosis. The main reasons for the removal/exchange of implants were infections (11 breasts, 3.4%) and necrosis (4 breasts, 1.2%). The risk for necrosis, infection, and wound dehiscence was mainly associated with the type of incision, especially skin-reducing incisions, and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m
conclusionSevere complications occurred primarily in patients with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m TRIAL REGISTRY: This study was retrospectively registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) on 20.06.2024. DRKS-ID: DRKS00034493. https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00034493 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
39505750What 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.