Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41174120›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2025

Impact of incision type in breast cancer-conserving mastectomy: a comparative analysis of outcome.

Gianluca Vanni, Marco Pellicciaro, Marco Materazzo, Alice Bertolo, Amir Sadri, Alessio Fazi, Benedetto Longo, Massimiliano Berretta, Valerio Cervelli, Oreste Claudio Buonomo

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Gianluca VanniBreast Unit Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Marco PellicciaroBreast Unit Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy. marcopell62@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9557-2850
Marco MaterazzoBreast Unit Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Alice BertoloBreast Unit Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Amir SadriPlastic Surgery, Great Ormond Hospital for Children, NHS Foundation Trust, London, WC1N 3JH, UK.
Alessio FaziBreast Unit Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Benedetto LongoPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Massimiliano BerrettaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Messina, 98100, Messina, Italy.
Valerio CervelliPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Oreste Claudio BuonomoBreast Unit Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conserving mastectomy is widely used due to its cosmetic benefits and the possibility of undergoing immediate breast reconstruction. The types of incisions vary, and the best method remains a topic of debate. In this study, we evaluate the impact of the incision type on complication outcomes. A retrospective analysis was conducted, considering all conserving mastectomies and dividing them into groups based on the incision type. A total of 290 patients were enrolled: 34 (11.7%) had a radial incision, 95 (32.8%) transverse incision with skin or NAC excision, 48 (16.6%) inframammary fold incision, 39 (13,4%) omega incision, 37 (12.8%) periareolar incision, and 37 (12.8%) Wise-pattern incision. Flap ischemia, NAC necrosis, and skin necrosis had a higher incidence rate in patients who underwent the Wise-pattern incision and periareolar incision, with relative p values of <0.001, 0.041, and 0.035, respectively. Considering only nipple-sparing mastectomies in breast cancer patients, overall complications, skin necrosis, and delay in adjuvant treatments showed a higher incidence in patients who underwent Wise-pattern incisions. The relative p values were 0.001, 0.004, 0.054, and 0.001, respectively. In multivariate analysis, inframammary fold incision reduced the risk of nipple necrosis, while Wise-pattern incision increased the risk (OR 0.656; 3.611-fold and p value were, respectively, 0.026 and 0.038). Wise-pattern incision and periareolar incision increase the incidence of complications as nipple areola complex (NAC) and skin necrosis but do not affect reconstruction failure. Inframammary fold incision reduces the risk of complications. The incision should be customized based on the tumor location, biology and extent, breast volume, ptosis, type of reconstruction, and risk factors.

Indexed as

Breast cancer surgeryBreast reconstruction complicationsConserving mastectomy incisionImplant-based reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID41174120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.