ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Minimally invasive axillary lymph node dissection versus conventional axillary lymph node dissection: a comparative study on short-term efficacy in breast cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive and open axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Endoscopic Axillary Lymphadenectomy in Breast Cancer: Evolution, Current Evidence, and Future Perspectives.Cancers · 2026Review
- [Application of pectoralis major fascia in robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction with gel implant].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted Axillary Lymph Node Dissection for Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis in Breast Cancer.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Anatomy of the Breast Fascia System: Peripheral-to-Central Approach.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to compare the short-term clinical efficacy of minimally invasive axillary lymph node dissection (MIAD) versus conventional axillary lymph node dissection (CAD) in the treatment of breast cancer with positive axillary lymph nodes.
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of the clinical data of breast cancer patients who underwent MIAD and CAD in the Breast Surgery Department from January 2022 to August 2024. The primary outcomes assessed included surgical results, complications, post-operative upper limb function, and quality of life score for both groups.
resultsThis study enrolled 147 patients, with 71 undergoing MIAD (including 25 with endoscopic-assisted axillary lymph node dissection and 46 with robotic-assisted axillary lymph node dissection) and 76 undergoing CAD. Compared to CAD, the mean intraoperative blood loss in the MIAD was lower (5.63 ± 4.16 vs. 21.13 ± 6.81 ml, p < 0.001). Impressively, in patients with BMI ≥ 24 kg/m
conclusionsMIAD is a safe alternative to CAD, particularly for obese patients. It significantly reduces intraoperative blood loss while improving post-operative shoulder joint function and enhancing quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40562955What 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.