The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Mark Sisco to Humans

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Mark Sisco has written about Humans.
Connection Strength

0.370
  1. Safety and factors affecting same-day discharge following mastectomy and immediate alloplastic reconstruction. J Surg Oncol. 2024 Feb; 129(2):201-207.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  2. Oral Antibiotics Do Not Prevent Infection or Implant Loss after Immediate Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023 05 01; 151(5):730e-738e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  3. Patient-reported outcomes among women with unilateral breast cancer undergoing breast conservation versus single or double mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021 Jan; 185(2):359-369.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  4. The burden of postmastectomy breast reconstruction. J Surg Oncol. 2020 Dec; 122(7):1298-1299.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  5. Long-term Outcomes After Pediatric Free Flap Reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2018 10; 81(4):449-455.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  6. Trends and variation in the use of nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer in the United States. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 11; 160(1):111-120.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  7. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: A contemporary perspective. J Surg Oncol. 2016 Jun; 113(8):883-90.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  8. The Effect of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy on Perioperative Complications in Women Undergoing Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A NSQIP Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Oct; 22(11):3474-80.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  9. Advanced age is a predictor of 30-day complications after autologous but not implant-based postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Feb; 135(2):253e-261e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  10. The quality-of-life benefits of breast reconstruction do not diminish with age. J Surg Oncol. 2015 May; 111(6):663-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  11. Refinements in anchoring the gracilis muscle for facial reanimation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 May; 131(5):857e-858e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  12. Have we expanded the equitable delivery of postmastectomy breast reconstruction in the new millennium? Evidence from the national cancer data base. J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Nov; 215(5):658-66; discussion 666.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.014
  13. The implantable venous Doppler for perforator flap monitoring: report of a false-negative signal. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Apr; 121(4):223e-224e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  14. Anterior interosseous nerve syndrome following shoulder arthroscopy. A report of three cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Feb; 89(2):392-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  15. A simple technique to anchor prosthetic mesh to bone. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 Dec; 116(7):2059-60.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  16. ASO Visual Abstract: Establishment and Feasibility of an Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction Program in a Community Health System. Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 03; 31(3):2044.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  17. Establishment and Feasibility of an Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction Program in a Community Health System. Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Jan; 31(1):672-680.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  18. Wise-Pattern Mastectomy with an Inferior Dermal Sling: A Viable Alternative to Elliptical Mastectomy in Prosthetic-Based Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024 03 01; 153(3):505e-515e.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  19. Animal models of ischemic wound healing. Toward an approximation of human chronic cutaneous ulcers in rabbit and rat. Methods Mol Med. 2003; 78:55-65.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  20. Acellular Dermal Matrix-Associated Complications in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Two Human Tissues. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 Sep 01; 148(3):493-500.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  21. Patients Undergoing Bilateral Mastectomy and Breast-Conserving Surgery Have the Lowest Levels of Regret: The WhySurg Study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Oct; 28(10):5686-5697.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  22. The modern approach to the nipple-sparing mastectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2020 Jul; 122(1):29-35.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  23. The effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy on breast-related charges: A 5-year analysis. J Surg Oncol. 2018 Jul; 118(1):212-220.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  24. Impact of an In-visit Decision Aid on Patient Knowledge about Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: A Pilot Study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Jan; 24(1):91-99.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  25. Patient satisfaction with nipple-sparing mastectomy: A prospective study of patient reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q. J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep; 114(4):416-22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  26. Survey of the Deficits in Surgeons' Knowledge of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy. JAMA Surg. 2016 Apr; 151(4):391-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  27. Advanced Age Does Not Worsen Recovery or Long-Term Morbidity After Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2016 Feb; 76(2):164-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  28. Wait times for breast surgical operations, 2003-2011: a report from the National Cancer Data Base. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Mar; 22(3):899-907.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.004
  29. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: an interim analysis and review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Feb; 22(2):370-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.004
  30. Mucosal tube technique for creation of esophageal anastomosis after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009 Jun; 87(6):1703-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.003
  31. Rectourethral fistula associated with two short segment urethral strictures in the anterior and posterior urethra: single-stage reconstruction using buccal mucosa and a radial forearm fasciocutaneous free flap. Urology. 2006 Jan; 67(1):195-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.002
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.