. 2022 Apr 11;22:391. doi: 10.1186/s12885-022-09485-5

Table 2.

Summary of findings table

Summary of findings:
Adipose fat transfer compared to non for breast cancer surgery
Patient or population: breast cancer surgery Setting: Breast Reconstruction Intervention: Adipose fat transfer Comparison: non
Outcomes	Anticipated absolute effects^* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	№ of participants (studies)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
Outcomes	Risk with non	Risk with Adipose fat transfer	Relative effect (95% CI)	№ of participants (studies)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
Overall Survivall (OS) assessed with: Time to any death follow-up: range 36 months to 88.7 months	Low		HR 0.47 (0.32 to 0.70) [Overall Survivall]	2918 (4 non-randomised studies)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate^a
	967 per 1.000	984 per 1.000 (977 to 989)	HR 0.47 (0.32 to 0.70) [Overall Survivall]	2918 (4 non-randomised studies)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate^a
Disease Free Survival (DFS) assessed with: time to any systemic or local recurrence event follow-up: range 36 months to 89 months	Low		HR 0.90 (0.65 to 1.25) [Systemic or local progression]	2629 (7 non-randomised studies)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate^b,c
	915 per 1.000	923 per 1.000 (895 to 944)		2629 (7 non-randomised studies)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate^b,c
Local Recurrence (LR) assessed with: time to local recurrence (months) follow-up: range 36 months to 120 months	Low		HR 0.87 (0.64 to 1.16) [Local Recurrence]	6713 (11 non-randomised studies)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate^d,e
	970 per 1.000	974 per 1.000 (966 to 981)	HR 0.87 (0.64 to 1.16) [Local Recurrence]	6713 (11 non-randomised studies)	⨁⨁⨁◯ Moderate^d,e

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI)

CI confidence interval, HR hazard Ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence

High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect

Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different

Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect

Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

Explanations

^a Krastev et al. which has higher mortality in the control group

^b Ferscth et al. - does not provide the estimatives of variability in the data for main outcomes, adverse effects, atrrition bias, patients were not representative of the target population, without adjustment for confounders

^c Stumpf et al. does not inform adverse effects, atrittion bias, without adjustment for potential confounders, does not have statistical power to detect difference

^d Mazur et al. does not inform adverse effects, atrittion bias, patients were not representative of the target population. Cases and controls were recruited from different populations. There is evidence of data dredging. There is no adjustment according to follow up. Inadequate statistical analysis. There is no statistical power to detect difference.

^e Petit et al. 2013 included only DCIS tumors