ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Sustainability in Reconstructive Breast Surgery: An Eco-audit of the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Pathway.
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Efficiency and Sustainability in the Skin Cancer Excision Pathway: Life Cycle Assessment and Process Map.JMIR dermatology · 2026Article
- Eco-audit of the Nail Bed Injury Treatment Pathway at a Tertiary Care Hospital.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Sustainability in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: An Eco-Audit of the Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Pathway.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Quaternary Plastic Surgery: An Eco-audit of the Autologous Microtia Reconstruction Pathway.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
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: The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap provides an effective and popular means for autologous breast reconstruction. However, with the complexity of the pathway, the environmental impact of the pathway has yet to be evaluated. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 42 unilateral DIEPs at a single reconstructive center was performed. Process mapping and life-cycle analyses were performed for equipment, staff, patients, and land. A bottom-up approach was adopted to calculate carbon dioxide equivalent estimates for the initial consultation, preoperative, intraoperative, and immediate postoperative periods. Results: This study estimated the carbon footprint of a patient undergoing DIEP flap surgery to be approximately 233.96 kg CO Conclusions: This study estimates the carbon footprint of the DIEP pathway. Strategies to mitigate the impact of carbon emissions including usage of reusable vs single-use equipment, virtual consultations, standardization of equipment packs, and optimizing waste disposal were suggested areas for improvement. Data from manufacturers on life-cycle assessments were limited, and further work is needed to fully understand and optimize the impact of DIEP surgery on the environment.
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.