SynthesisCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
Contrast of Mastoscopic and Conventional Axillary Lymph Node Dissection of Patients With Breast Cancer: Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility analysis of treating breast cancer patients with breast-conserving surgery via a periareolar incision combined with non-lipolytic suspension-type mastoscopy.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Endoscopic Axillary Lymphadenectomy in Breast Cancer: Evolution, Current Evidence, and Future Perspectives.Cancers · 2026Review
- Review
- Efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted versus endoscopic-assisted axillary lymph node dissection in node-positive breast cancer: a retrospective comparative study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Comparison of minimal access and open breast surgery: a propensity score-matched study on postoperative immune function in breast cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- A new surgical modality for breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer: a case report and literature review.Gland surgery · 2023Article
- Application of fluorescence endoscopy with methylene blue dye and indocyanine green dual-tracer method in sentinel lymph node biopsy for women with breast cancer.Gland surgery · 2023Article
- Comparison of single-pore non-liposuction near-infrared laparoscopy with conventional open surgery for axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early breast cancer: a single-center, small-sample retrospective study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mastoscopic axillary lymph node dissection (MALND) is a currently used and safe surgical treatment option for breast cancer. However, the extensive application of MALND is still debatable because of the use of conventional axillary lymph node dissection (CALND). Therefore, in the current study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of MALND and CALND for obtaining evidence-based conclusions about the short-term and long-term outcomes of MALND for patients with breast cancer. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CNKI were comprehensively searched for articles published between January 1998 and January 2019. Then Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for quality assessment. The Review Manager software version 5.0 was utilized for generating forest maps and funnel plots. Twelve studies including 2157 patients were selected for the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the number of lymph node dissections, tumor recurrence rate, axillary drainage, postoperative hospitalization time, and tumor size between the MALND and CALND groups (
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.