ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
National Trends in Immediate and Early Delayed Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: An Updated Population-Based Study of 84,088 Reconstructed Patients.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practice patterns in prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: A survey of UK plastic surgeons.JPRAS open · 2026Article
- Targeted Multidisciplinary Continuous Improvement Process Reduces Time to Breast Cancer Surgery with Immediate Reconstruction.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Marketing a Plastic Surgery Practice: Strategies, Insights, and Practical Considerations.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Hypofractionated Versus Conventional Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- "Going Flat" After Mastectomy: A Social Media Analysis of Patient Perspectives and Educational Needs.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere remain ongoing concerns regarding the accessibility of breast reconstruction. We aimed to analyze recent data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to reveal trends in immediate and early delayed breast reconstruction across the United States.
methodsPatients undergoing mastectomy from 2010 to 2020 were identified using the SEER database. The trends of postmastectomy reconstruction were described. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to identify covariates associated with reconstruction. Multiple comparisons based on logistic models were employed to assess interactions among reconstruction-related factors.
resultsA total of 84,088 patients underwent reconstruction within four months following mastectomy, accounting for 36.4% of all postmastectomy patients. Immediate and early delayed reconstruction use increased from 26.4% in 2010 to 41.8% in 2020, with increased proportion of implant-based techniques over time. The receipt of reconstruction among younger patients not only demonstrated a higher proportion, but also exhibited a more significant upward trend over the years (P for interaction < 0.001). The correlation between substantial partner support and willingness for reconstruction was stronger among older patients (P for interaction < 0.001). While patients exhibiting favorable responses to neoadjuvant therapy typically displayed heightened propensities for reconstruction, this disparity was particularly pronounced among older individuals (P for interaction < 0.001).
conclusionBreast reconstruction has increased over time, with implant-based reconstruction being the most common approach employed. The decision-making process for reconstruction is influenced by various factors, with noteworthy interactions among them. Collaboration among patients, tumor surgeons, and reconstructive surgeons is essential for reconstruction decisions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40770497What 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.