The Effects of Moufarrege Total Posterior Pedicle Reduction Mammaplasty on Breast Cancer Incidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The Moufarrege total posterior pedicle breast reduction involves complete denudation of the breast offering free access to all breast quadrants. This allows a total resection of the upper outer quadrant which is most implicated in breast cancer. The objective was to assess the postoperative incidence of breast cancer in the cohort of women who underwent the Moufarrege technique. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for patients operated on between 1981 and 1997, and a written questionnaire was sent to all patients in 2008. Patients were asked about the date of their last mammogram and any diagnosis of breast cancer. Expected numbers of cancers were calculated from rates in the general population. Age standardization at the time of surgery was done and the incidence of breast cancer was calculated in relation to age at time of surgery and age at last follow-up. Results were presented as standardized incidence ratios (SIR) with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: We included 924 patients. The response rate was 60.38% (n = 558). Mean patient age at the time of the surgery was 32.8 years (14 to 82). Mean resection weight was 620 grs per breast (250 - 1600). Breast cancer was significantly reduced by nearly 64 percent in patients who responded to our questionnaire and were aged 35 years or more at the time of surgery ([SIR] = 0.36; 95 % [CI] 0.09 - 0.93). No difference in breast cancer incidence was observed in patients aged less than 25 years at the time of the surgery. Conclusion: The Moufarrege Total Posterior Pedicle breast reduction is a reliable and safe procedure that may offer a superior breast cancer risk reduction based on the results of our retrospective chart review and patient questionnaire.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".