MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047842047 · doi:10.1177/1090820x10395506

Aesthetic and Technical Refinements in Latissimus Dorsi Implant Breast Reconstruction: A 15-Year Experience

2011· article· en· W2047842047 on OpenAlexaff
Salvatore J. Pacella, Jeffrey E. Vogel, Michelle Locke, Mark A. Codner

Bibliographic record

VenueAesthetic Surgery Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Implant and Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast reconstructionImplantSeromaMastectomySurgeryComplicationBreast cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap and implant breast reconstruction procedure has undergone many refinements over its lifetime. In fact, the authors have made many aesthetic and technical refinements to their own approach to breast reconstruction. OBJECTIVES: The authors review the historical progression of latissimus flap and breast reconstruction techniques and compare these to their own 15-year experience. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for all latissimus and implant breast reconstructions performed by the senior author (MAC) from July 1994 to June 2009, for a total of 52 procedures in 31 patients. Surgical and oncological data, complications, and outcomes data were recorded. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients at time of surgery was 47.6 years. Average mastectomy weight was 283 grams and average final implant volume was 364 cc. Average follow-up was three years, four months. Of the 52 total procedures, 34.6% were immediate breast reconstructions utilizing skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM); 13.5% of the reconstructed breasts also had preservation of the areola (areolar-sparing mastectomy [ASM]). The most common complication was donor site seroma (40.4%). Aesthetic and surgical refinements identified over the time period included the adoption of SSM and ASM techniques, immediate nipple reconstruction, the placement of an adjustable saline implant to allow for postoperative size adjustment, and implant placement in the prepectoral position. The overall latissimus dorsi implant reconstruction success rate was 94.2% (49/52). CONCLUSIONS: The data demonstrated a successful outcome for latissimus dorsi and implant breast reconstruction for patients with a low or normal body mass index and a small (A to C cup) breast size. The aesthetic outcome of latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction has been improved over the past 15 years by the adoption of SSM and ASM techniques. Immediate nipple reconstruction and the placement of an adjustable saline implant potentially render this procedure a true single-stage reconstruction. Prepectoral implant position provides good aesthetics while preserving the subpectoral space for future management of capsular contracture if required.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAesthetic Surgery JournalSame topicBreast Implant and ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207