ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Plasma-Treated Acellular Dermal Matrix in Nipple Reconstruction: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction, maintaining the projection and volume of the reconstructed nipple is so important.
methodsThis study evaluates the effectiveness of plasma-treated human acellular dermal matrix (hADM) in maintaining nipple projection and volume after nipple reconstruction using the modified C-V flap technique. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 42 patients who received either plasma-treated (n=20) or plasma-untreated (n=22) hADM grafts from October 2022 to January 2025. Nipple volumes were measured immediately after surgery and at intervals of 1, 4, 8, and 24 weeks using Antera 3D
resultsThe percentage of initial nipple volume maintained in the plasma-treated group was significantly greater than in the plasma-untreated group at 4 weeks (93.3% vs. 87.7%, p < 0.05), 8 weeks (87.3% vs. 78.6%, p < 0.01), and 24 weeks (85.9% vs. 74.9%, p < 0.005). At 1 week, volumes were similar (99.4% vs. 98.6%, p > 0.05). A reduction in revision rates was noted, though this was not statistically significant. The incidence of complications was comparable between the two groups.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that plasma treatment of hADM improves volume maintenance in nipple reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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
42901994What 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.