Breast Reconstruction: The Oncoplastic Approach
Vindigni V., Marena F., Zanettin C., Bassetto F.
Narrative Review, published in J Clin Med (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- J Clin Med (2024)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 39200860
- PMCID
- PMC11355501
- DOI
- 10.3390/jcm13164718
- Citations
- 10
Abstract (original English)
Breast reconstruction surgery is continualladvancing, significantly enhancing patient well-being. Current surgical techniques prioritize minimizing donor site morbidity while achieving a more natural breast appearance. Increasing patient preferences for avoiding prosthetic materials in reconstruction, along with advancements in oncological safety and heightened aesthetic expectations, are driving the exploration and development of innovative approaches. Today's reconstructive options range from straightforward oncoplastic glandular remodeling to intricate microsurgical procedures. This narrative review, titled "Breast reconstruction: the oncoplastic approach," provides a comprehensive overview of contemporary trends in breast-conserving treatment. It evaluates the indications for these techniques and offers guidance to plastic surgeons in crafting personalized treatment plans. This approach presents a valuable single-stage alternative or adjunct to traditional prosthetic or microsurgical reconstruction methods.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.