Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40330161›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025

Meta-analysis of Objective Sensory Outcomes From 764 Breasts Shows Superior Sensation of Autologous Reconstruction With Neurotization.

Puja M Jagasia, Kazimir Bagdady, Sumanas W Jordan, Michael A Howard, Megan E Fracol

Registry-linked trialAbstract 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. It is linked to trial NCT07308275 (Longitudinal Evaluation of Direct Neurotization Technique in Breast Reconstruction With Fully Autologous Components), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

NCT07308275 nanot yet recruitingnot on this map

Longitudinal Evaluation of Direct Neurotization Technique in Breast Reconstruction With Fully Autologous Components: An Assessment of BREAST-Q Sensation Module, Cutaneous Pressure Threshold, Neuregulin 1 (NRG1) Expression, Nerve Fiber Cross-sectional Area, Intraepidermal Nerve Fiber Density (IENFD), and Breast Morphometry

TypeinterventionalSponsorFakultas Kedokteran Universitas IndonesiaRan2025 to 2027Enrolled28ConditionsBreast Reconstruction After Mastectomy, Neurotization, Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction, Peripheral Nerve RegenerationArmsAutologous Breast Reconstruction With Direct Neurotization, Autologous Breast Reconstruction without Neurotization
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

5 authors.

Puja M JagasiaFrom the Division of Plastic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Kazimir BagdadyFrom the Division of Plastic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Sumanas W JordanFrom the Division of Plastic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Michael A HowardFrom the Division of Plastic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Megan E FracolFrom the Division of Plastic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Breast and nipple-areolar complex (NAC) sensation after breast reconstruction impacts postoperative quality of life. Autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) are standard techniques. Neurotization has shown promise in improving sensory outcomes. Methods: A computerized search was conducted on March 20, 2024, using the following databases: PubMed (1994-2024), MEDLINE (1996-2024), Embase (1988-2024), Web of Science (1997-2024), Scopus (2004-2024), and CINAHL (1994-2024). The following terms were used: "Semmes-Weinstein" and "mastectomy" OR "Semmes-Weinstein" and "breast reconstruction." Studies that reported objective results from Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing by breast and NAC quadrant at least 12 months postoperatively were included. Statistical analysis was performed using multivariate regression analysis incorporating variables that were found to be significant on univariate regression analysis. This was followed by pairwise comparisons using Tukey tests to directly compare ABR, IBBR, and ABR with neurotization. Results: Thirteen studies reporting on sensory outcomes of 764 reconstructed breasts met the aforementioned criteria. ABR with neurotization resulted in better sensation outcomes on the breast and NAC compared with either ABR or IBBR. When controlling for radiation, ABR without neurotization resulted in more sensate NAC region/central mound compared with IBBR. These findings suggest that ABR with neurotization following skin-sparing mastectomy results in better sensation at the new NAC compared with nipple-sparing mastectomy with ABR without neurotization. Conclusions: ABR with neurotization may result in superior breast sensation, which is associated with increased quality of life and satisfaction, compared with ABR without neurotization and IBBR.

Identifiers

PMID40330161
PMCPMC12055064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.