ArticleGland surgery2020
Nipple-sparing mastectomy for early breast cancer: the importance of intraoperative evaluation of retroareolar margins and intra-nipple duct removal.
Article in Gland surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: current evidence, technical considerations, and clinical outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Intraoperative Examination of Retro-Areolar Margin is not Routinely Necessary During Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Breast cancer local recurrence after mastectomy with immediate latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap reconstruction: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2023Article
- How to Perform Repeat Sentinel Node Biopsy Safely After a Previous Mastectomy: Technical Features and Oncologic Outcomes.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasingly performed for breast cancer (BC) treatment. To ensure local control with this procedure, it is important to obtain clear surgical margins. Here, we aimed to estimate the confidence in intraoperative evaluation of the retroareolar margin (IERM) and the necessity of removing the intra-nipple ducts.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated 224 BC (infiltrating carcinoma 178, ductal carcinoma in situ 46) patients, who underwent NSM. IERM was determined via cytology and frozen sections. Following gland removal, the intra-nipple ducts were excised and embedded in paraffin for analysis. The retroareolar tissue was also paraffin-embedded and reanalyzed for definitive evaluation of retroareolar margins (DERM). The IERM predictive capacity in relation to DERM and the frequency of intra-nipple duct involvement were estimated.
resultsIERM classified the sub-nipple areolar complex area as cancer-free in 219 cases (97.8%). The condition of clear retroareolar margin was confirmed by DERM in 216 cases (98.6%). The IERM accuracy was estimated as 98.6%. Ductal carcinoma
conclusionsIn conclusion, IERM affords high accuracy and its results are suitable to manage the nipple-areolar complex. Nevertheless, some patients may retain residual disease in the intra-nipple ducts; thus, these ducts should ideally be removed during NSM.
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.