ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Chest Wall Perforator Flaps in Partial Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
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 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Extended applications of chest wall perforator flaps in breast surgery: case series and systematic literature review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Pooled it
- Role of Chest Wall Perforator Flaps in Breast Surgery: Military Cancer Centre Experience.European journal of breast health · 2026Article
- Versatility of Lateral Intercostal Artery Perforator Flaps in Partial Breast Reconstruction: First National Experience of Peru.European journal of breast health · 2026Article
- Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Expanding the Boundaries of Breast Conservation with Chest Wall Perforator Flaps.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Chest Wall Perforator Flaps in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Series of 157 Consecutive Cases at the Paris Breast Center.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Chest Wall Perforator Flaps for Partial Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Center, Single-Surgeon Experience.European journal of breast health · 2026Article
- Personalized Breast Reconstruction After Breast-Conserving Therapy: Risk-Informed Approaches to Technique Selection and Timing.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- The anterior intercostal artery perforator flap in immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction: current applications and future perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy is the standard treatment for early-stage management of breast cancer but may cause volume loss. In such cases, muscle-sparing chest wall perforator flaps (CWPFs) offer a reliable, function-preserving reconstruction option with low donor-site morbidity, making them particularly useful for volume replacement. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the outcomes and complications of CWPFs in breast-conserving surgery. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles reporting postoperative outcomes and complications following partial breast reconstruction using CWPFs were included. A proportional meta-analysis was then performed to calculate pooled complication rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Results: Seventeen studies, involving 1893 unilateral CWPFs, were included. The rate of recipient-site complications was 13% (95% CI: 7%-20%), and the flap loss rate was 1% (95% CI: 0%-3%). Reexcision and completion mastectomy rates were 12.9% and 1.46%, respectively. Patient satisfaction was consistently high, assessed using a 4-point Likert scale (n = 3), BREAST-Q (n = 2), or author-designed questionnaires (n = 2). Surgeon and independent reviewer assessments also indicated favorable aesthetic results but lacked standardization across studies. Conclusions: This meta-analysis synthesized all existing evidence on CWPFs for partial breast reconstruction across all breast quadrants. The 1893 flaps reviewed showed consistently favorable outcomes, broad applicability based on tumor location, and low complication rates. CWPFs seem to be an ideal option for partial breast reconstruction in patients with small breasts and large defects.
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.