ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2025
Assessing aesthetic outcomes of different incision types for nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by radiation therapy in prepectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction: a retrospective study.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 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.
- Hyaluronidase attenuates radiation-induced skin fibrosis through extracellular matrix remodeling and suppression of inflammatory-profibrotic signaling.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study analyzes the aesthetic outcomes associated with inframammary fold (IMF) incisions compared to radial incisions, with or without a periareolar component (referred to as periareolar/radial, PR), considering nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) followed by prepectoral direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstruction and subsequent post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). We assessed changes in breast and nipple symmetry, nipple-to-IMF distance, and nipple Y-axis coefficients to understand how different incisions influence post-radiation aesthetic outcomes.
methodsForty patients who underwent NSM and prepectoral DTI reconstruction followed by PMRT between September 2019 and December 2022 in a single institution were included. Patients were divided into PR incision (n = 9) and IMF incision (n = 31) groups, with the latter further separated into IMF 1 group (surgeries from 2019 to 2021, n = 13) and IMF 2 group (surgeries in 2022, n = 18). Pre- and postoperative (6-18 months after surgery) analyses of body measurements and medical photographs were conducted using the Seoul Breast Esthetic Scoring Tool (S-BEST) software, developed by same institution, to calculate breast symmetry scores, nipple-to-IMF distance, and nipple Y-axis coefficients. Statistical analyses assessed differences between groups.
resultsAll groups showed decreased breast symmetry scores postoperatively (PR group: -1.111, IMF 1 group: -0.539, IMF 2 group: -0.389) and increased nipple-to-IMF distance (PR group: 0-0.2 cm, IMF 1 group: 0.2-0.5 cm, IMF 2 group: 0.3-0.4 cm). The changes in nipple y-axis coefficients were minimal across all groups. And the PR group received a lower average radiation dose (47.64 ± 5.2 Gy) than IMF 1 group (54.45 ± 5.28 Gy) and IMF 2 group (54.07 ± 4.79 Gy). Statistical analysis indicated no significant differences across the groups (p > 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test).
conclusionsWhile IMF and PR incisions yielded similar aesthetic outcomes post-radiation, IMF incisions showed trends toward better symmetry, especially at higher radiation doses. These findings support the IMF incision as a favorable choice in NSM with DTI reconstruction followed by PMRT, though patient anatomy and preferences remain critical for surgical planning.
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.