ArticleCancers2022
Level II Oncoplastic Surgery as an Alternative Option to Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction in the Neoadjuvant Setting: A Multidisciplinary Single Center Experience.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Oncological outcomes following extreme oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (eOPBCS) for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC): A systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Pooled it
- Locally advanced breast cancer patients should be cautious about the immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy: a pooling analysis of safety and efficacy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Post-NAC Microcalcifications in Breast Cancer: Rethinking Surgical Indications in the Era of Precision Oncology.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Young Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treated with Upfront Surgery: Overview of Oncological Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Impact of Oncoplastic Surgery on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Breast Cancer.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- An Innovative Scoring System to Select the Optimal Surgery in Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- The Evolving Approach to Breast Cancer: Moving toward De-Escalating Treatment and Personalized Medicine.Cancers · 2023Article
- Local Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Is Mastectomy Superior to Breast-Conserving Surgery?Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Conservative Surgery in cT4 Breast Cancer: Single-Center Experience in the Neoadjuvant Setting.Cancers · 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oncoplastic surgery level II techniques (OPSII) are used in patients with operable breast cancer. There is no evidence regarding their safety and efficacy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological and aesthetic outcomes of this technique compared with those observed in mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR), in post-NAC patients undergoing surgery between January 2016 and March 2021. Local disease-free survival (L-DFS), regional disease-free survival (R-DFS), distant disease-free survival (D-DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared; the aesthetic results and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated using BREAST-Q. A total of 297 patients were included, 87 of whom underwent OPSII and 210 of whom underwent MIBR. After a median follow-up of 39.5 months, local recurrence had occurred in 3 patients in the OPSII group (3.4%), and in 13 patients in the MIBR group (6.1%) (
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.