SynthesisBiomolecules & biomedicine2025
Comparison of robotic, conventional, and endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction for breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic-assisted versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: current evidence, technical considerations, and clinical outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Endoscopic and Da Vinci robotic-assisted surgery in breast cancer: a narrative review of current evidence, technical advances, and future perspectives.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Minimally Invasive Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Early Experience With Endoscopic and Robotic Techniques.European journal of breast health · 2026Article
- The current status and hot topics of endoscopic techniques in breast cancer surgery: a global bibliometric and visualization analysis (1999-2024).Gland surgery · 2026Article
- A retrospective comparison of clinical outcomes between endoscopic and open nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant reconstruction versus breast-conserving surgery.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Long-term oncologic outcomes of minimal access (endoscopic or Robotic Assisted) nipple-sparing mastectomy compared with conventional approach in breast cancer - a propensity score matching analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Article
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
In this network meta-analysis (NMA), we aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM), conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (CNSM), and endoscope-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (ENSM), each combined with immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction (IPBR), for the treatment of breast cancer. Relevant studies published up to June 15, 2024, were identified through searches of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Data extracted from these studies were analyzed using Stata 15.1 and the Gemtc 1.0.1 package in R 4.2.3. A Bayesian framework and a Markov Chain Monte Carlo model were employed to conduct the NMA. Additionally, a ranking chart was generated to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the surgical methods. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the NMA. The results indicated that ENSM with immediate implant-based reconstruction was associated with a smaller incision compared to CNSM. RNSM combined with IPBR was linked to a lower incidence of total complications, Grade 3 complications, and nipple-areola complex necrosis than CNSM. Furthermore, RNSM with IPBR demonstrated a lower recurrence rate than CNSM. However, CNSM with IPBR showed better outcomes in terms of surgical time, hospital stay, and positive margin infiltration. In contrast, RNSM and ENSM, both combined with IPBR, outperformed CNSM in terms of incision length, complication rates, and recurrence 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.