| Title |
The optimal reconstruction size of nipple-areola complex following breast implant in breast cancer patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-2230-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Naomi Nagura-Inomata, Yoshiko Iwahira, Naoki Hayashi, Takako Komiya, Osamu Takahashi |
| Abstract |
Changes in the areola size after reconstruction of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) following mastectomy and breast reconstruction with a silicon implant in primary breast cancer patients have not been well examined. This study aimed to investigate time-dependent changes in the size of the donor and graft NACs and to assess clinical factors influencing these changes. Fifty-eight consecutive patients who underwent nipple-areola reconstruction were retrospectively evaluated. Nipple-areola diameter was measured immediately after the NAC reconstruction and at each follow-up visit for at least 36 months. The donor NAC constituted 81 % of the graft NAC at the time of operation. The size of the donor NAC gradually increased by up to 36.8 % after the operation. The size of the graft NAC showed a decrease by 4.5 % at 7 months, followed by recovery to the initial value. The ratio of the donor site size to the graft site size was increased at month 1 and then showed a gradual decrease to 1.08 at 36 months. A history of mastopexy or reduction for the donor site was independent factors associated with changes in the NAC size. To achieve symmetry, the diameter of the donor NAC immediately after the reconstruction should be at least 20 % smaller than that of the graft NAC, especially for patients without a history of additional operations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 1 | 20% |
| Other | 1 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 20% |
| Researcher | 1 | 20% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 80% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2023.
All research outputs
#7,939,656
of 24,579,513 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#478
of 1,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,522
of 310,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#51
of 185 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,579,513 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,508 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 185 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.