Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39474556›Full record

ArticleCase reports in oncology

Feasible Nipple Preservation Techniques for Breast Cancer with Slight Nipple Retraction.

Hitomi Matsuki, Shoji Oura

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Case reports in oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hitomi MatsukiDepartment of Surgery, Kishiwada Tokushukai Hospital, Kishiwada, Japan.
Shoji OuraDepartment of Surgery, Kishiwada Tokushukai Hospital, Kishiwada, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Nipple retraction has long been regarded as an absolute contraindication factor for nipple preservation in breast cancer surgery. Case Presentation: A 62-year-old woman was referred to our hospital for the treatment of breast cancer with slight nipple retraction. Imaging findings showed neither direct cancer infiltration to the nipple-areolar complex nor lymphadenopathy. Due to the patient's strong preference, we attempted to preserve the nipple-areolar complex as follows. First, we made a quasi-complete skin flap except for the nipple-areolar complex area in a thick flap manner. Second, we fully skeletonized the sub-nipple mammary gland. Next, we pinched the skeletonized sub-nipple mammary gland with the scissors and pushed the scissors toward the nipple base as close as possible with the blades kept open. After that, we resected the nipple base using the scissors on pulling the mammary gland toward the opposite direction of the nipple. Frozen section and postoperative pathological study showed clear surgical margins and no lymph node metastasis. The patient developed temporary superficial dermal necrosis of the nipple but healed without leaving any sequelae in the nipple-areolar complex. The patient has been well for 20 months without any recurrences. Conclusion: Our nipple-preserving techniques enable safe nipple preservation even for breast cancer patients with slight nipple retraction.

Indexed as

Breast cancerNipple base resectionNipple preservationNipple retraction

Identifiers

PMID39474556
PMCPMC11521478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.