MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conservative mastectomies and immediate reconstruction with the use of ADMs.

2015· article· en· W1959726532 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexander Govshievich, Ron B. Somogyi, Mitchell H. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Implant and Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCapsular contractureSeromaBreast reconstructionSurgeryImplantDehiscenceMastectomyWound dehiscencePectoralis major muscleTissue expansionFat necrosisComplicationBreast cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In recent years, a novel approach to immediate breast reconstruction has been introduced with the advent of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). In the setting of conservative mastectomies where the native skin envelope is preserved, placement of ADM at the lower pole in continuity with the pectoralis major muscle (PMM) provides additional support, allowing direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. The following manuscript presents the senior author's experience with ADM-assisted reconstruction and provides a detailed description of surgical technique along with a comprehensive discussion of patient selection and potential complications. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients undergoing direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following skin sparing or nipple sparing mastectomy with the use of ADM (AlloDerm; LifeCell Corp., Branchburg, USA) was conducted at Women's College Hospital in Toronto over a 5-year period [2008-2013]. Demographic data, previous radiation therapy and post-operative complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients representing 119 breasts were identified. Average follow-up was 16 months (range, 3-51 months). Twenty-seven complications were recorded for a complication rate of 22.7% (27/119). Complications included six cases of capsular contracture (Baker III/IV), five cases of red skin syndrome, four cases of rippling, three cases of dehiscence and two cases of seroma. Overall, direct-to-implant reconstruction was successfully completed in 97.5% of breasts (116/119). One case of infection was treated with explantation and conversion to autogenous reconstruction. Two breasts with tissue necrosis or dehiscence had the implants removed and replaced with tissue expanders. Overall reoperation rate was 9.7% (7/72 patients). CONCLUSIONS: ADM assisted direct-to-implant breast reconstruction has been shown to be a safe option for women who are candidates for skin sparing or nipple sparing mastectomies. Judicious patient selection, effective collaboration between the oncologic and reconstructive surgeon, careful evaluation of post-mastectomy skin flaps and precise surgical technique are paramount to the success of this technique.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.136 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicBreast Implant and ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207