ArticleSurgery today2026
A practical strategy for skeletal chest wall reconstruction after resection of malignant chest wall lesions: a single-institution experience.
Article in Surgery today, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNo standardized strategy exists for skeletal chest wall reconstruction after the resection of malignant chest wall lesions. We reviewed our single-institution experience with defect-specific material selection and perioperative outcomes.
methodsThe subjects of this retrospective study were 20 patients who underwent reconstruction after resection of malignant chest wall lesions between January 2014 and June 2025. Procedures were categorized as skeletal chest wall reconstruction or adjacent or combined thoracic structure reconstruction. Defects, materials, margins, complications, recurrence, and survival were analyzed.
resultsFifteen patients underwent skeletal chest wall reconstruction and five underwent adjacent or combined thoracic structure reconstruction. Polypropylene mesh was used for selected anterior, lateral, or extensive skeletal defects when stable fixation and sufficient soft-tissue coverage were achievable. In the 20-patient cohort, resection margin status was R0 in 11 patients and R1 in 9, recurrence developed in 8, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days. MRSA empyema developed in one patient, requiring open-window thoracostomy, vacuum-assisted closure therapy, and thoracoplasty.
conclusionsSkeletal chest wall reconstruction should be individualized according to defect-specific factors. Polypropylene mesh may be feasible for selected defects when adequate fixation, appropriate tension, and sufficient soft-tissue coverage can be achieved. The flowchart is a practical institutional framework rather than a validated algorithm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42831927What 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.