Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39808213›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025

Effect of Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-Based Reconstruction on Post-Mastectomy Radiation Dosimetry.

Jamie S K Takayesu, Brigit Baglien, Donna Edwards, Robin Marsh, Jennifer Shah, Lori Pierce, Corey Speers, Adeyiza Momoh

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jamie S K TakayesuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Brigit BaglienSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health Systems, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Donna EdwardsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Robin MarshDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jennifer ShahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Lori PierceDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Corey SpeersDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Adeyiza MomohSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health Systems, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. amomoh@med.umich.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe placement of breast implants in a prepectoral plane has become increasingly popular in breast reconstruction, although data on how this affects radiation delivery in women with breast cancer are limited. This study aimed to assess the dosimetric differences in radiation plans for immediate breast reconstruction between prepectoral and subpectoral implants.

methodsIn this study, a retrospective review and dosimetric analysis of patients with breast cancer who underwent immediate implant-based reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) were performed. Patients with pre- or subpectoral implants were matched 1:1 by use of boost and radiation field. Demographics and complications were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-square test for categorical variables. Dosimetric data were analyzed to compare doses to the target, heart, lungs, and pectoralis major using a Mann-Whitney U test.

resultsThe study identified 42 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Planning target volume (PTV) coverage was better in the prepectoral group (PTV D95%, 45.61 vs. 43.38 Gy; p = 0.04). The heart and lung doses did not differ. The patients with subpectoral implants had a lower absolute volume of pectoralis major receiving 20 to 45 Gy.

conclusionThis assessment of radiation dosimetry for patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction found that the primary dosimetric difference between prepectoral and subpectoral implants was the dose to the pectoralis major. Otherwise, no significant difference in target coverage was found. These data suggest that implant placement can be selected to optimize reconstructive outcomes, with less concern for compromise to the oncologic quality of PMRT.

Indexed as

Breast ImplantationBreast ImplantsBreast NeoplasmsMammaplastyMastectomyPectoralis MusclesRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedOrgans at RiskPrognosisRadiometry

Identifiers

PMID39808213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.