Observational studyAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Aesthetic Outcomes and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Volume Replacement (Chest Wall Perforator Flaps) versus Volume Displacement: An Observational Study.
Observational study in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies on oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) have focused primarily on European-descent populations. However, Chinese women have distinct breast morphological characteristics, such as smaller volume and denser glandular tissue. These anatomical differences may influence the choice of procedure and postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to compare differences in aesthetic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes between volume replacement (VR) and volume displacement (VD) techniques in Chinese patients with breast cancer to clarify the applicability of different surgical approaches.
methodsThis study analyzed patients who underwent OBCS with chest wall perforator flaps (CWPFs) or VD at the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University (Luzhou City, China) from 2022 to 2024. Demographic, surgical, oncological, and complication data were collected. Patients completed the BREAST-Q questionnaire preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively, and aesthetic outcomes were evaluated using the criteria proposed by Ueda et al. Statistical analysis was performed on baseline characteristics, questionnaire scores, and aesthetic scores.
resultsA total of 159 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, five underwent mastectomy due to positive margins. The two cohorts showed no significant difference in preoperative BREAST-Q scores. Patients who underwent OBCS with CWPFs reported significant improvements in satisfaction with breasts, physical well-being: chest, and aesthetic outcomes.
conclusionChest wall perforator flaps demonstrated significant advantages in aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes compared with volume displacement. Therefore, they should be offered as an alternative to volume displacement for women with small-to-medium breasts. 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
41514084What 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.