ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2023
Factors associated with alteration of nipple or skin sensation and impact of duration of time following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM): an analysis of 460 cases with comparison of conventional versus endoscopic- or robotic-assisted NSM.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 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.
NIPSENSE - A Comparative Study of Nipple and Skin Sensation Preservation After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy With Conventional, Endoscopic, and Robotic Techniques
Comparison of Breast Sensory Recovery Between Conventional and Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Combined With Prepectoral Implant Reconstruction：an Open-label, Multicentre, Randomised, Controlled Trial
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Oncological, surgical, and cosmetic outcomes of endoscopic versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Nipple Areolar Complex (NAC) Neurotization After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy (NSM) in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of the Literature.The breast journal · 2025Pooled it
- Key Points of Endoscopic Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gynecomastia Based on Refined Anatomy: A Case Series.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Nipple-areolar complex neurotization in implant-based breast reconstruction: a narrative review.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Five Decades of Innovation-Tailored Breast Cancer Treatment: 1976-2026.World journal of surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic and endoscopic minimally invasive breast surgery: a narrative synthesis on divergent global adoption and emerging trends.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- 7-step endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy with implant-based breast reconstruction: nipple sensation preservation and low complications.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Recent Advancements in Robotic-assisted Plastic Surgery Procedures: A Systematic Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Article
- Reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction: an improvement of conventional minimal access breast surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
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 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe current study aims to evaluate the nipple and skin sensation following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and identify patient-, surgical-, or treatment-related factors affecting nipple or skin sensation in this cohort.
methodsPatients who received NSM with postoperative nipple and skin sensation test evaluation at a single institution over the past 10 years were retrospectively retrieved from a prospectively collected breast cancer surgery database.
resultsA total of 460 NSM procedures were included in this current study, with the mean age of 48.3 ± 9.1. Three-hundred eighty-three (83.3%) patients had breast reconstructions. One-hundred seventy-four (37.8%) received conventional NSM (C-NSM), 195 (42.4%) endoscopic-assisted NSM (E-NSM), and 91 (19.8%) robotic-assisted NSM (R-NSM) procedures. For nipple sensation assessment, 15 (3.3%) were grade 0, 83 (18.2%) grade I, 229 (49.7%) grade II, and 133 (28.9%) grade III (normal sensation), respectively, with mean grade score of 2.1 ± 0.7. The preserved (grade III) nipple sensation rate was 36.2% (63/174) in the C-NSM group, 26.7% (52/195) in the E-NSM group, and 19.7% (18/91) in the R-NSM group (P = 0.06). The "time since surgery to last evaluation" was significantly longer in the C-NSM group (45.6 ± 34 months) or E-NSM group (44.7 ± 35.8 months) as compared to R-NSM group (31.8 ± 16 months, P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, peri-areolar incision showed higher grade of nipple sensation (OR: 2.1, P = 0.02) compared to upper outer quadrant incision, and longer follow-up time post-NSM showed significant improvement of nipple or skin sensation (> 60 months vs. ≦ 12 months: nipple odds ratio (OR) = 5.75, P < 0.01; skin, OR = 1.97, P < 0.05).
conclusionOur current analysis showed some factors to be related to postoperative nipple or skin sensation, and longer "time after surgery" was associated with significant improvement of nipple and skin sensation in patients who received NSM, regardless of the surgical approaches. SYNOPSIS: Our current analysis showed a significant portion of patients with decrease or loss of nipple or skin sensation after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). Several factors associated with preserved nipple or skin sensation were identified, including age, surgical methods, surgical wound location, and association of time from surgery showing that improvement of partial nipple or skin sensation was evident after a longer follow-up.
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.