MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2090793169 · doi:10.1097/00006534-200106000-00009

Evaluation of the Factors Related to Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction

2001· article· en· W2090793169 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Établissements canadiensKingston General Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineBreast reconstructionSurgeryImplantRectus abdominis muscleMastectomyLatissimus dorsi musclePatient satisfactionRetrospective cohort studyReconstructive surgeryBreast cancerCancer

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A retrospective study was conducted in 75 consecutive patients requiring postmastectomy breast reconstruction over a period of 30 months. Each woman was offered one of the following four reconstructive options: free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap (total number of reconstructions, n = 34); latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap (with or without expander and implant, n = 14); endoscopically assisted harvest of the latissimus dorsi muscle (with expander and implant, n = 13); and application of expander and implant only (n = 12). Of those patients originally selected for retrospective study, six did not meet the short-term prognostic criteria, and concerted attempts to contact two others proved unsuccessful. The remaining 67 patients were examined for the clinically assessed aesthetic appearance of the reconstructed breast(s), the subjective self-assessment of patient satisfaction, and the possible development of postoperative complications. Of these patients, six required bilateral surgery, which accounts for a final sample size of 73 individual breast reconstructions. The 67 individual patients were assessed after a minimum time of 6 months postreconstruction and became the sampling units for analysis. The free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap procedure was the preferred method of breast reconstruction in 34 of 73 patients (47 percent), provided that it was generally agreed that the patient could endure a prolonged operation and that there was sufficient unscarred abdominal tissue available. Thereafter, postmastectomy radiotherapy at the chest wall became the primary criterion for assignment of a patient to a particular surgical procedure. Whenever radiotherapy resulted in poor-quality skin at the chest wall, endoscopically assisted transfer of latissimus dorsi muscle flap was considered to be the optimal treatment (13 of 73 patients, or 18 percent). Body mass index and smoking were secondary factors that were taken into account when this alternative technique was being considered.In the absence of radiotherapy, and provided that the chest wall was minimally scarred, patients who were reluctant to have reconstruction with autologous tissue were treated with expander and implant only (12 of 73, or 16 percent). This third procedure is a physically less arduous ordeal for the patient and was therefore the choice for all patients for whom a prolonged operation was not a realistic option. The fourth (and final) surgical procedure, latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap (with or without expander and implant), was selected for all patients with a better quality of skin over the chest wall, those whose abdomen was extensively scarred, and those who were on a general surgeon's operating list to undergo immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy (14 of 73, or 19 percent). Equally good aesthetic results could be demonstrated with each of the four treatment options, provided that the reconstructive procedure selected was optimal for the individual patient and in accordance with the criteria described above. A variety of potential risk factors were considered for association with postoperative complications, including prescribed medication, obesity, smoking behavior, use of radiotherapy, and the recorded aggregated operative time. Of these, only body mass index (p < 0.001) and use of steroids (p = 0.016) were identified as having statistically significant effects on the incidence of adverse events.Finally, the general level of satisfaction expressed by the patient was highly correlated with a good appearance of the reconstructed breast, the physical comfort experienced while wearing a brassiere, and the general mobility of the unsupported reconstruction.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,258
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,264
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle