ReviewGland surgery2015
Skin-sparing mastectomy.
Review in Gland surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03627442 (Pilot Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Pilot Study: Post-operative Outcomes of Enhanced Energy Delivery Dissection for Mastectomy Breast Flap Creation With Immediate Breast Reconstruction
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comparison of Modified Radical Mastectomy, Breast Conservation Therapy, and Nipple-sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Implant Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Complications, patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and aesthetic outcomes of nipple-sparingTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2026Article
- Skin-Reducing Mastectomy and Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Without Mesh: A Single-Institute Experience.Cureus · 2025Article
- Minimal Scar Autologous Breast Reconstruction with Skin-sparing Mastectomy.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Article
- Review
- Quality of Life After Bilateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Simultaneous Reconstruction Using Pre-Pectoral Silicone Implants.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The surgical treatment of breast cancer has evolved rapidly in recent decades. Conservative treatment was adopted in the late 1970s, with rates above 70%, and this was followed by a period during which the indications for surgical intervention were expanded to those patients at high risk for BRCA1, BRCA2 mutations, and also due to new staging standards and use of nuclear magnetic resonance. This increase in the indications for mastectomy coincided with the availability of immediate breast reconstruction as an oncologically safe and important surgical procedure for prevention of sequelae. Immediate reconstruction was first aimed at correcting the consequences of treatment, and almost immediately, the challenge of the technique became the achievement of a satisfactory breast appearance and shape, as well as normal consistency. The skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) in conservation first and nipple-areola complex (NAC) later was a result of this shift that occurred from the early 1990s to the present. The objective of this review is to present all these developments specifically in relation to SSM and analyze our personal experience as well as the experience of surgeons worldwide with an emphasis on the fundamental aspects, indications, surgical technique, complications, oncological safety, and cosmetic results of this procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.