ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2025
A new option of reconstruction after extensive chest wall resection.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 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.
- An integrated digital-to-surgical framework for patient-specific chest wall resection and reconstruction using 3D-printed titanium implants: proof-of-concept study.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Article
- Hybrid chest wall reconstruction using a composite scaffold and mesh: a surgical technique.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Primary surgical closure of complete sternal cleft in a neonate.JTCVS techniques · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChest wall reconstruction plays an important role in the outcomes of chest wall resection. However, there being a huge variety of materials at disposable, the best option has not yet been well defined. The Vitagraft® is a synthetic and absorbable material, that works as an osteoinduction and osteoconduction for bone regeneration. It consists of a β-phase Tricalcium Phosphate Ceramic (β-TCP) and the Polylactic Glycolic Acid Polymer (PLGA). Therefore, this study intends to assess the safety of Vitagraft® use in the chest wall.
methodsA prospective study, in which the patient's chest was reconstructed with Vitagraft®. Each patient was followed after the procedure for at least three months. The following variables were considered: KPS, ECOG, preoperative treatment, defect size, myocutaneous flap, the time between surgeries, complications, and mortality.
resultsEight resections were performed due to tumor findings. One reconstruction was a treatment for sternal cleft, another for Poland's syndrome, and finally as a consequence of late sternal dehiscence. Primary closure was performed in 63.6 % of the patients. Vitagraft® was used in association with mesh in eight cases. Reoperation was required in two cases, and prosthesis removal for one of them. Respiratory failure and major systemic complications were not evidenced.
conclusionIn the present study, the first to assess Vitagraft® in chest wall reconstruction, the second operation was necessary for 28 %, and removal was mandatory for 14 %. Until now, chest postoperative tomography has been showing good prosthesis biocompatibility. The authors need further details about the ossification time especially relating to the size of the resection.
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.