Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40214254›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025

Reverse‑sequence endoscopic nipple‑sparing mastectomy with direct‑to‑implant breast reconstruction and air inflation adjustment technique in patients with large or severely ptotic breast: a single-center prospective cohort study.

Hui Dai, Xiaoman Cao, Hao Wu, Faqing Liang, Yanyan Xie, Kawun Chung, Qing Zhang, Tianyuan Li, Zhenggui Du

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Aesthetic outcomes of synthetic mesh in single-axillary approach endoscopic implant-based breast reconstruction].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Hui DaiDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2257-0859
Xiaoman CaoDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Hao WuDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Faqing LiangDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yanyan XieDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Kawun ChungDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qing ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Tianyuan LiDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhenggui DuDepartment of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7412-0270

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe applicability of reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-E-NSM) with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIBR) is worth exploring in patients with large or severely ptotic breasts (LSPB) who were not recommended or even considered contraindicated in open NSM, conventional endoscopic NSM, and robotic NSM. The study aimed to compare the safety and aesthetic outcomes between patients with LSPB and non-LSPB (NLSPB) undergoing R-E-NSM with DIBR. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe single-center prospective cohort study enrolled 562 patients undergoing R-E-NSM and DIBR. Surgical safety, aesthetic outcomes, and oncologic safety were compared between patients with LSPB and NLSPB.

resultsAfter propensity score matching, 88 LSPB patients and 256 NLSPB patients were included (median [interquartile range] follow-up time: 21.0 [13.8, 32.4] vs. 23.0 [10.6, 32.2] months, P  = 0.889). The mastectomy weight was significantly higher in the LSPB group (576.6 ± 144.8 g vs. 330.1 ± 105.7 g, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in any complications (27.3% vs. 22.7%, P  = 0.381), major complications (6.8% vs. 3.1%, P  = 0.230), minor complications (20.5% vs. 21.1%, P  = 0.889) and implant-related complications (21.6% vs. 24.6%, P  = 0.566) between the LSPB and the NLSPB groups. In the LSPB group, the Ueda scores in patients with air inflation adjustment technique (AIAT) were better than those without AIAT, though no significant difference ( P  = 0.110). Compared to the NLSPB group without AIAT, the LSPB group with AIAT had similar Ueda scores ( P  = 0.870) and a significantly higher increase in BREAST-Q scores of breast satisfaction ( P  = 0.004). Oncologic outcomes had no significant difference between the two groups (all P > 0.05).

conclusionR-E-NSM with DIBR and AIAT provides comparable surgical safety and aesthetic outcomes for patients with LSPB and NLSPB, offering a new option for LSPB patients.

Indexed as

BreastBreast ImplantationBreast NeoplasmsEndoscopyMammaplastyNipplesAdultBreast ImplantsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedProspective StudiesTreatment Outcomebreast cancercohort studydirect-to-implant breast reconstructionlarge or ptotic breastreverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy

Identifiers

PMID40214254
PMCPMC12165474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
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.