Page 83 - Read Online

Haddock et al. Plast Aesthet Res 2024;11:47 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2347-9264.2024.60 Page 10 of 12

Figure 3. Example before (left) and after (right) photo of a patient undergoing a bilateral DIEP flap reconstruction in 2 h and 2 min. She
underwent one revision to excise and bury the skin paddles.

DECLARATIONS
Authors’ contributions
Made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study and performed data analysis and
interpretation: Haddock NT, Steele T, Teotia SS

Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.

Financial support and sponsorship
None.

Conflicts of interest
All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval and consent to participate
Due to the systematic review, the information used in this database is publicly available and unrestricted re-
use is permitted under open license.

Consent for publication
Not applicable.

Copyright
© The Author(s) 2024.

REFERENCES
1. Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momoh A, et al. Trends and variation in use of breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer undergoing
mastectomy in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:919-926. DOI PubMed PMC
2. Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, et al. A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr
Surg 2013;131:15-23. DOI PubMed
3. Masoomi H, Hanson SE, Clemens MW, Mericli AF. Autologous breast reconstruction trends in the United States: using the nationwide
inpatient sample database. Ann Plast Surg 2021;87:242-247. DOI PubMed
4. Shah JK, Amakiri UO, Cevallos P, et al. Updated trends and outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction in the United States, 2016–
2019. Ann Plast Surg 2024;92:e1-e13. DOI PubMed
5. Dempsey K, Mathieu E, Brennan M, et al. The role of breast reconstruction choice on body image patient-reported outcomes at four
years post-mastectomy for breast cancer: a longitudinal prospective cohort study. Psychooncology 2022;31:54-61. DOI PubMed