SynthesisBreast cancer research and treatment2026
Extended applications of chest wall perforator flaps in breast surgery: case series and systematic literature review.
Synthesis in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeChest wall perforator flaps (CWPFs) are integral to modern oncoplastic breast surgery, offering volume replacement without muscle sacrifice. While their role in partial breast reconstruction is established, data on extended and non-conventional applications remain limited. This study aims to synthesize current clinical experience and delineate the extended applications of chest wall perforator flaps beyond conventional oncoplastic contexts.
methodsThis study combined a prospective institutional case series from two tertiary centers (Singapore and UK) with a systematic literature review of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. Eligible studies described CWPF use for extended oncologic, reconstructive, or aesthetic indications. Data were synthesized descriptively according to PRISMA guidelines.
resultsSix women underwent LICAP-based reconstruction for complex indications including skin-replacing excisions, implant salvage, chronic sinus closure, and total autologous reconstruction with adjunct lipofilling. All flaps were fully viable with good contour restoration and symmetry, and adjuvant therapy proceeded without delay. The systematic review identified 38 studies (≈ 324 patients, 349 flaps). CWPFs, most commonly LICAP, LTAP, and TDAP, were used for defects following oncologic resection, radiotherapy injury, implant failure, or post-bariatric contour correction. Overall flap success exceeded 95%, with major complications under 5%. Donor-site morbidity was minimal, with high aesthetic satisfaction (> 90%).
conclusionsCWPFs represent muscle-sparing reconstructive options whose utility may extend beyond conventional oncoplastic indications; this descriptive series supports their feasibility and short-term outcomes across a range of selected clinical settings, suggesting that CWPFs warrant further consideration in the management of complex breast and chest wall defects.
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.