ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Innovations in Nipple-areolar Complex Reconstruction: Evaluation of a New Prosthesis.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. 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.
- A review of nipple-areola complex reconstruction and tattooing techniques.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Article
- Prosthetic nipple areola complex reconstruction after breast reduction: a case report.Case reports in plastic surgery & hand surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The reconstruction of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) is a crucial step for completing breast restoration with patient satisfaction. Surgical reconstruction or tattooing of the NAC may not be preferable or feasible for some patients. There is no universal method for NAC that is ideal for every patient or clinical situation. Various approaches often do not maintain projection over time. Over time, several techniques have been perfected, including the C-V flap, to improve and support projection for patients with bilateral implant-based reconstructions. Methods: We used, for the first time, prosthetic devices for NAC reconstruction and examined the safety of these devices associated with ease of implantation and patient satisfaction levels using a survey conducted during a 1-year follow-up. We enrolled 20 individuals who opted for these NAC prostheses following unilateral or bilateral breast reconstruction and following NAC excision. Results: Ninety percent of the participants expressed satisfaction or high satisfaction with the appearance and balance of the new NAC. The prosthetics enhanced the overall body self-image and self-regard of all the study participants. Except for 4 patients, there were no reports of skin adverse reactions, infections, or erosion. Conclusions: Encouraged by these auspicious outcomes that indicate a significant rate of safety and satisfaction, we believe that this straightforward, noninvasive, affordable medical device deserves consideration as a reconstructive option for all patients seeking breast reconstruction, promoting full body integrity.
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.