ArticleJournal of breast cancer2024
Safety of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia at the Nipple Margin in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.
Article in Journal of breast cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: An Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) Clinical Practice Guideline.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Guideline
- Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Pooled it
- Recurrent atypical ductal hyperplasia in the setting of gynecomastia in a male patient: a unique finding and brief literature review.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- A Decade Later: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Overall Survival, Disease-Free Survival, Local Recurrence, and Nipple-Areolar Recurrence Following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeControversies persist regarding contraindications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). This study aimed to assess the accuracy of subareolar frozen section analysis and identify risk factors for nipple-areola complex (NAC) recurrence post NSM.
methodsConsecutive cases of primary invasive breast cancer undergoing NSM at our single center from January 2015 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.
resultsThe nipples were retained in 126 patients (127 breasts), and the areola was retained with nipple excision for five breasts. Frozen section analysis demonstrated a sensitivity of 81.8% and specificity of 95.3%. The NAC recurrence rate was 4.3% over a median follow-up period of 48 (30-105) months. An atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) at the margin emerged as an independent factor for NAC recurrence in multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio, 25.464; 95% confidence interval, 1.841-352.145;
conclusionFrozen sections of subareolar tissue are reliable and re-excision may be necessary when ADH is detected at the nipple margin in NSM. The NAC recurrence rate was low, and the outcome was favorable following wide local excision.
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.