ArticleGland surgery2025
Comparative study of layered breast defect reconstruction and traditional surgery in the treatment of plasma cell mastitis: a single-center study.
Article in Gland surgery, 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.
- Recent Advances in Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Integrated Traditional Chinese Medicine Therapy for Plasma Cell Mastitis.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most-cited articles on tissue expander use in breast reconstruction: insights from CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix.Gland surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Plasma cell mastitis (PCM) is a chronic inflammatory breast disease that presents challenges in achieving both effective disease control and satisfactory cosmetic outcomes. Layered breast defect reconstruction (LBDR) is a technique that may reduce recurrence and improve breast aesthetics. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical value of LBDR compared to traditional surgical repair in PCM patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 90 female PCM patients treated at the Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital between 2002 and 2018. Patients with histologically confirmed PCM who underwent surgical treatment and completed at least 3 years of follow-up were included. Based on the surgical technique, patients were divided into two groups: traditional surgery (n=24) and LBDR (n=66). Baseline clinical characteristics-including age, body mass index (BMI), disease duration, and comorbidities-were collected and compared between groups. The primary outcomes were postoperative recurrence and aesthetic satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and complication rates. Logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of favorable outcomes. Results: The two groups were generally comparable in baseline characteristics, including BMI, smoking history, breastfeeding history, and clinical symptoms (all P>0.05). However, patients in the LBDR group were significantly older (P=0.003), and lesion locations differed between groups (P=0.02). Compared to traditional surgery, LBDR significantly reduced the recurrence rate (4.55% Conclusions: LBDR may provide favorable oncologic and cosmetic outcomes in selected PCM patients without increasing perioperative risks. However, given the retrospective, non-randomized design, further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.
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.