Trial reportBMC endocrine disorders2025
A comparative study on the short-term and long-term efficacy of endoscopic lipolysis, liposuction, and traditional open excision in gynecomastia treatment.
Trial report in BMC endocrine disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study investigates the comparative short-term and long-term efficacy of endoscopic lipolysis and liposuction versus traditional open excision in the treatment of gynecomastia.
methodsA total of 140 male patients diagnosed with gynecomastia and admitted to our hospital from April 2021 to May 2022 were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups based on the surgical treatment method: the control group (traditional open excision, n = 70) and the observation group (liposuction under endoscope, n = 70). Comprehensive demographic and clinical data were collected for both groups. Surgical indicators, postoperative complication rates, and pain levels measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) one month post-surgery were observed and compared. Additionally, recurrence rates and patient satisfaction scores were evaluated one year after the procedure.
resultsThere were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between the two groups (P > 0.05). The observation group exhibited shorter incision lengths, reduced operation times, and decreased hospital stays compared to the control group (P < 0.05), alongside less intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the observation group (P < 0.05). At one and three weeks post-surgery, the observation group reported lower VAS scores for pain compared to the control group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in recurrence rates between the groups one year post-surgery (P > 0.05). However, the observation group achieved higher scores in terms of chest appearance, wound scarring, nipple and areola aesthetics, and overall satisfaction (P < 0.05).
conclusionEndoscopic lipolysis and liposuction not only demonstrate advantages such as lower complication rates and expedited recovery in the treatment of gynecomastia but also provide long-term efficacy comparable to traditional surgical methods. This approach significantly enhances patient satisfaction, establishing it as a preferred treatment option due to its safety profile and ability to deliver superior cosmetic outcomes.
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.