ArticleGland surgery2025
Video-assisted submuscular breast reconstruction: evaluating a novel technique in high-risk patients.
Article in Gland surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revisiting Total Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction: Technical Refinements for Improved Outcomes.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Lateral Intercostal Artery Perforator (LICAP) Flap for Level II Oncoplastic Breast Reconstruction: Our Initial Experience.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Symphony of rebirth: a retrospective comparative cohort study on heterologous breast reconstruction after radiotherapy.Gland surgery · 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: Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent oncological diseases worldwide, with mastectomy often necessary for treatment. Post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is essential for restoring physical integrity and improving patients' quality of life, especially in high-risk individuals with advanced age, obesity, diabetes, smoking habits, or a history of radiotherapy. Traditional submuscular reconstruction techniques are effective but often associated with higher rates of complications in this patient population. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel video-assisted procedure (VAP) for submuscular breast reconstruction, focusing on its ability to reduce complications and enhance outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis compared 17 high-risk patients who underwent VAP with 127 patients treated using traditional non-video-assisted procedures (NVAP) between September 2022 and June 2024. Both groups were comparable in age, body mass index (BMI), and risk factors. Data on postoperative complications, including bleeding, wound dehiscence, and infections, were collected and analyzed. Statistical significance was determined using appropriate tests, with a P value <0.05 considered significant. Results: The VAP group demonstrated significant reductions in complications compared to the NVAP group. No cases of postoperative bleeding were reported in the VAP group, while 8.66% of NVAP patients experienced bleeding. Wound dehiscence rates were also lower in the VAP group (5.88%) compared to the NVAP group (10.24%). The minimally invasive nature of VAP allowed for precise dissection and reduced tissue trauma without prolonging surgical times. Conclusions: The findings suggest that VAP is a safer and more effective alternative for high-risk patients requiring submuscular breast reconstruction. By minimizing complications and enhancing both functional and aesthetic outcomes, VAP offers a promising innovation in reconstructive surgery. Larger, randomized trials are necessary to validate these results and establish VAP as a standard of care in diverse clinical settings.
Indexed as
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.