ArticleUpdates in surgery2020
Evolution and time trends of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a single-center experience.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Complication Profiles of Immediate Implant-Based versus Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction following Nipple/Skin-Sparing Mastectomy in Patients with Prior Breast-Conserving Surgery and Radiotherapy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Safety of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia at the Nipple Margin in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.Journal of breast cancer · 2024Article
- Oncologic Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Breast Cancer in BRCA Gene Mutation Carriers: Outcomes at 70 Months Median Follow-Up.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- New classifications of axillary lymph nodes and their anatomical-clinical correlations in breast surgery.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy (NSM) requires the entire breast tissue to be removed, maintaining the nipple-areola complex, and represents nowadays the gold standard of the demolitive breast surgery. Although it represents the evolution of conservative breast surgery, NSM presents some limitations in the selection of women candidates for treatment, and still there are no real guidelines regarding its indications, but simply objective data to address the choice. How the breast surgery approach to demolitive and conservative surgery has changed over time? We evaluated throughout the years (from 2009 up to 2018) the time trend of NSM at our institution and analysed the main differences between patients undergone NSM and other mastectomies and/or breast conserving surgery in terms of cancer size, multicentricity and biological profile. We found 781 NSMs, 1261 other mastectomies and 5621 breast conservative surgeries. Among NSMs, 39.6% were reconstructed with tissue expander and 58.1% with definitive prosthesis. From 2009 to 2018 we found a general increase of NSM rate (from 21.3% of all mastectomies in 2009 to 67.3% in 2018) and a decrease of total mastectomies (from 78.7% of all mastectomies in 2009 to 32.7% in 2018). In line with the literature data, our data confirm that in the recent years NSM represents the gold standard for radical breast surgery. Undisputed in prophylaxis, NSM is continuously acquiring more support in being used as first line treatment for locally advanced disease.
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.