ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2025
Immediate 2-Stage breast reconstruction outcomes after proton or photon postmastectomy radiotherapy.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Capsular Contracture in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Comprehensive Narrative Review of Pathophysiology, Risk Factors, and Contemporary Controversies.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Shifting Practice Patterns in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction in China: Insights From a 13-year Large-scale Retrospective Cohort.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) on immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) outcomes among patients treated with proton or photon radiotherapy. Material and Methods: Patients who had undergone mastectomy, immediate breast reconstruction, and PMRT at our institution were included in a retrospective analysis of risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI), unplanned reoperation, and reconstruction failure. Univariate Cox models were used to examine associations of variables with reconstruction outcomes. Results: Two-hundred thirty-one women were included, of whom 224 (97.0 %) underwent two-stage IBR with placement of a tissue expander and 7 (3 %) had direct-to-implant IBR. One-hundred sixty-five patients (71.4 %) received proton and 65 (28.6 %) received photon therapy. Twenty-nine patients (12.6 %) received hypofractionation. Median follow-up was 1.8 years. Two-year cumulative risk of SSI was 17.83 % (95 % CI 12.27-24.41 %); unplanned reoperation was 16.19 % (95 % CI 10.06-22.10 %); and reconstruction failure was 7.60 % (95 % CI 3.55-12.11). On multivariable analysis, prophylactic use of Mepitel Film reduced the risk of SSI [HR: 0.35 (95 % CI: 0.18-0.69), Conclusions: Although approximately one-fifth of women experienced SSI or unplanned reoperation, the rate of reconstruction failure was low (7.6%) and most women achieved a successful reconstruction outcome with PMRT using photons or protons. The lower rate of SSI and unplanned reoperation with use of Mepitel Film highlights the need for further evaluation.
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.