ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2024
Usefulness of cordless ultrasonic cutting energy devices in endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy: a retrospective study.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Clinical Effectiveness and Operating Efficiency of Different Ultrasonic Devices for Performance of Sleeve Gastrectomy.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Minimal-access nipple-sparing mastectomy: current evidence, limitations, and future evaluation.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2026Article
- Knowledge of energy-based devices among surgical residents: a cross-sectional study.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (E-NSM) is a minimally invasive surgical technique that shows good results in patients with breast cancer. The authors compared 3 different types of commercial energy devices to examine their efficacy and safety in E-NSM performed with breast reconstruction. Methods: A total of 36 cases of E-NSM were conducted with either Sonicision (S group, n = 11), Harmonic (H group, n = 6), or Thunderbeat (T group, n = 19). The clinicopathologic factors and postoperative complications, including nipple or skin necrosis and surgical site seroma volume, were evaluated for 3 months after surgery. Results: The surgical duration of E-NSM was significantly shorter in the S group than in the H group (P = 0.043) and T group (P = 0.037). However, the total surgical duration including E-NSM and breast reconstruction, and the total and daily drainage volume of postoperative seroma did not differ significantly among the 3 groups. Even when the energy devices were compared according to their working principle, i.e., ultrasonic (S and H) Conclusion: Any energy device can be safely used for E-NSM with breast reconstruction without causing any major complications. However, cordless ultrasonic energy devices allow greater mobility for the surgeon and, therefore, may shorten surgical time in breast surgery.
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.