ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Radiotherapy dosimetry and complications in modified radical mastectomy with first-stage breast reconstruction: target coverage and lung protection.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesTo compare the radiotherapy dosimetry and complications in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy (MRM) with first-stage breast reconstruction (FSBR) versus MRM alone. The study aimed to investigate the effect of radiotherapy on breast reconstruction aesthetics and provide evidence for personalized treatment plans.
methodsA total of 82 female patients who underwent MRM between 2016 and 2019 were included. They were first divided into two groups: 51 patients received FSBR (FSBR group) and 31 did not (MRM group). Among the 59 patients who subsequently underwent radiotherapy, 28 were from the FSBR group and 31 were from the MRM group; the remaining 23 FSBR patients received no radiotherapy. Both groups received intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with the parameters that Planning target volume 1 (PTV1, regional lymph nodes) and planning target volume 2 (PTV2, chest wall) were both prescribed as 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks. The homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), target coverage, and dose/volume of organs at risk (OARs) were compared between these two groups. Radiotherapy-related complications were also analyzed. Additionally, the FSBR group was further subdivided into a radiotherapy subgroup (n = 28) and a non-radiotherapy subgroup (n = 23) to evaluate the effect of radiotherapy on breast aesthetics.
resultsFor OARs, the FSBR group showed better lung protection compared to the MRM group in terms of Dmean, Dmax, V5, V20, V30, and V40 (all P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in target coverage, HI, or CI between the groups (both P > 0.05). The incidence of radiodermatitis was similar (P > 0.05). The aesthetic outcomes of reconstructed breasts were significantly lower in the radiotherapy group compared to the non-radiotherapy group (P < 0.05). Despite reduced aesthetic outcomes, FSBR did not compromise radiotherapy dosimetry and provided better lung protection compared to MRM alone.
conclusionFSBR may be a viable option for patients requiring postoperative radiotherapy, as it offers comparable dosimetry and enhanced lung protection.
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.