ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Single Axillary Incision Versus Triple Lateral Chest Wall Incisions in Endoscopic Mastectomy for Gynecomastia: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis with Propensity Score Matching.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic mastectomy has gradually become an important surgical modality for the treatment of breast diseases, and is the preferred procedure for gynecomastia. However, endoscopic mastectomy presents challenges such as a steep learning curve, prolonged surgical duration, increased hospitalization costs, and high technical difficulty. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction of endoscopic mastectomy using a single axillary incision versus a triple lateral chest wall incision for gynecomastia.
methodsPatients were stratified into a single-port group and a three-port group based on the surgical approach. Propensity score matching was used for the nearest neighbor matching, adjusting baseline data differences at a 1:1 ratio, with a caliper value set at 0.2 to ensure comparability between the two groups. Clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction were compared after propensity score matching.
resultsA total of 36 pairs of patients were successfully matched after propensity score matching, with no differences in baseline characteristics (P > 0.05). Notably, the three-port group experienced longer surgical durations compared to the single-port group, alongside higher hospitalization costs (P < 0.05). There were no differences in surgical bleeding volume, postoperative drainage volume, extubation time, postoperative hospitalization time , surgical complications, visual analog scale pain scores, and recurrence rate (P > 0.05). After a 6-month follow-up, the vancouver scar scale assessment showed no differences in scar color, thickness, vascularity, softness, and total score (P > 0.05). Based on the BODY-Q questionnaire chest module scores, the single-port group showed better overall satisfaction in appearance (P = 0.038), especially in the smoothness of the chest wall, with significantly higher scores than the three-port group (P = 0.001). No differences were found in nipple symmetry, nipple sensation, and skin redundancy (P > 0.05).
conclusionThe single axillary incision endoscopic mastectomy demonstrated advantages in shorter surgical duration and lower hospitalization costs, while providing a smoother chest wall appearance, thereby enhancing overall patient satisfaction. Consequently, this surgical approach may arise as one of the preferred procedures for gynecomastia. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.