Retrospective observational cohort study on cosmetic outcome of using Ti‑Ni memory alloy wire for intradermal suture following mastectomy in patients with breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The method of suturing for incisions is crucial for the comprehensive treatment of clinical patients with breast cancer. Suturing is considered a major part of post-surgical recovery and may serve as a marker for evaluation of surgical outcome. The present study aimed to establish an effective means of suturing for patients who received modified radical surgery that helps to improve the cosmetic outcome of the incision. Enrolled patients were divided into an active and a control group. Ti-Ni memory alloy wire for intradermal suture in the active group and silk for interruption suture in the control group were applied to assess the different prognosis-associated factors. The Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was used to evaluate the wound size and the recovery time of the scars. The association between diabetes and the number of days of wound healing was also analyzed. The results indicated that the mean VSS score of the active group was decreased compared with that of the control group (P<0.001). The VSS scores of four main features (vascularity, pigmentation, pliability and height) between the two groups also statistically differed (P<0.001). Furthermore, the mean number of days of wound healing was significantly decreased for the active group compared with that for the control group (P=0.0026) in the patients with diabetes. In addition, the usage of Ti-Ni memory alloy wire was able to decrease the mean number of wound healing days between patients with diabetes and their non-diabetic counterparts (P=0.7009). The present study indicated that intradermal suture offers improved cosmetic outcome for patients undergoing mastectomy with or without axillary surgery. This technique may be useful for preventing scar overgrowth and for facilitating the recovery process in patients with diabetes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".