Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40275909›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025

Enhanced Postoperative Evaluation in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery With Interactive Versus Traditional Dressings: A Comparative Study.

Cesare Magalotti, Martina Nisi, Elisabeth Pastor Ruiz, Chiara Romiti, Andrea Tinti, Ivan Barillaro, Alessandro Muccitelli, Lisa Franchini, Daniela Brera, Giuseppe Guarro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Co-surgery in Breast Reconstruction: Is the Helping Surgeon Actually Hurting?Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

Cesare MagalottiFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Martina NisiFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Elisabeth Pastor RuizFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Chiara RomitiFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Andrea TintiFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Ivan BarillaroFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Alessandro MuccitelliFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Lisa FranchiniFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Daniela BreraFrom the Senologia-Breast Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Territoriale Pesaro Urbino, Italy.
Giuseppe GuarroDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Oncoplastic breast surgery balances tumor excision and aesthetics focusing on patient well-being. Patient-centered care is crucial aligning with contemporary healthcare goals. This study explored the impact of an interactive dressing on postoperative outcomes in oncoplastic breast surgery. Methods: A cohort of 376 patients undergoing bilateral oncoplastic breast surgery was studied. Traditional dressings were applied on one side and the interactive dressing on the other. Patient demographics, procedures, and outcomes were collected. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the BREAST-Q questionnaire. Statistical analysis used R software. Results: Comparing the interactive dressing to traditional dressings, 79.26% exhibited improved wound healing, 80.05% reported lower pain, and 80.32% preferred the side with the interactive dressing, according to the BREAST-Q. Efficient resource utilization is crucial. The interactive dressing's potential in wound healing aligns with evolving oncoplastic breast surgery practices. Conclusions: Comparing the interactive dressing with traditional dressings in oncoplastic breast surgery suggests advantages in wound healing, pain management, shorter hospital stays, and higher patient satisfaction. Further research is needed for confirmation. Patient-centric metrics such as the BREAST-Q support a holistic evaluation aligning with healthcare objectives for improved postoperative quality of life.

Identifiers

PMID40275909
PMCPMC12020685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.