ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2021
Oncologic Outcome of Endoscopic Assisted Breast Surgery Compared with Conventional Approach in Breast Cancer: An Analysis of 3426 Primary Operable Breast Cancer Patients from Single Institute with and Without Propensity Score Matching.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07539545 (A Comparative Study of Minimal Accessory-Incision-Assisted Endoscopic Breast-Conserving Surgery With Minimal Auxiliary Incisions Versus Conventional Open Breast-Conserving Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
A Comparative Study of Minimal Accessory-Incision-Assisted Endoscopic Breast-Conserving Surgery With Minimal Auxiliary Incisions Versus Conventional Open Breast-Conserving Surgery: A National Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Trial (MECO-BCS)
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncological, surgical, and cosmetic outcomes of endoscopic versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of endoscopic breast-conserving surgery versus conventional breast-conserving surgery for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Minimal incision-assisted endoscopic versus conventional open breast-conserving surgery: A multicentre randomized clinical trial.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Trial
- Oncological outcome of endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy versus conventional open mastectomy in early breast cancer: a multicenter cohort study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Comparative outcomes of conventional versus endoscopic-assisted surgery for breast phyllodes tumors: a single center retrospective cohort study.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2026Article
- A case report of breast abscess caused by Peptoniphilus harei after endoscopic breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy for breast cancer and literature review.BMC women's health · 2025Review
- Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes of Tumescence and Sharp Dissection Versus Electrocautery Dissection in Minimal-Access Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Prosthesis Breast Reconstruction: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Minimal access nipple-sparing mastectomy - the current European landscape.Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review · 2025Review
- Comparing the therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic minimally invasive surgery and traditional surgery for early-stage breast cancer: A meta-analysis.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Article
- Endoscopic resection of benign breast tumors via a single axillary incision using the insufflation method: a preliminary summary report.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- 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
- Single-Port Three-Dimensional Endoscopic-Assisted Axillary Lymph Node Dissection (S-P 3D E-ALND): Surgical Technique and Preliminary Results.The breast journal · 2024Article
- Single-port three-dimensional (3D) endoscopic-assisted breast surgery-preliminary results and patient-reported satisfaction in 145 breast cancer and gynecomastia cases.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Vacuum-assisted biopsy system for breast lesions: a potential therapeutic approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Minimal Access (Endoscopic and Robotic) Breast Surgery in the Surgical Treatment of Early Breast Cancer-Trend and Clinical Outcome From a Single-Surgeon Experience Over 10 Years.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopy-assisted breast surgery (EABS) performed through minimal axillary and/or peri-areolar incisions is a possible alternative to conventional breast surgery (CBS) for certain patients with breast cancer. In this study, we report the oncologic safety results of EABS compared with CBS.
methodsPatients underwent EABS for breast cancer during the period June 2010 to March 2020 were collected from the EABS database from single institute, and another cohort of patients, who received CBS, were identified to determine the effectiveness and oncologic safety of EABS. A case-control study was conducted using propensity score matching (PSM) to prevent bias from cases selection.
resultsA total of 3426 patients were enrolled in the current study, including 405 patients receiving EABS and 3021 underwent CBS. Before PSM, patients selected for EABS tend to be smaller in tumor size, node negative, early stage, low histologic grade, and HER-2 negative. After PSM, 343 patients underwent EABS were compared with another 343 patients received CBS. The margin involved rate in EABS group is 2.6%, and 5.6% in CBS group (p = 0.054) after PSM. In breast conserving cases, the margin involved rates were 2% in EABS group, and 7.2% in CBS group (p = 0.04). In Kaplan-Meier survival curves analysis, there was no difference in local regional recurrence (p = 0.89), distant metastasis (p = 0.08), and overall survival (p = 0.14).
conclusionThe preliminary oncologic safety analysis from current study showed EABS is a safe procedure and results in low margin involved rate, and no increase of locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis or mortality compared with CBS.
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.