ArticleJPRAS open2025
Management of nipple malposition after breast implant removal following nipple sparing mastectomy: An algorithmic approach.
Article in JPRAS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Infection is problematic in implant-based breast reconstruction and can be particularly challenging with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). Traditionally, infected tissue expanders (TEs)/implants are removed for several months resulting in nipple malposition. Negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and dwell (NPWTi-d) has been described to salvage infected TEs/implants. The effect of NPWTi-d on maintenance of skin envelope/nipple position with TE has not been well described. Surgical nipple correction in this group has not been well characterized. The purpose of this study is to evaluate correction of nipple malposition following implant removal with nipple-sparing mastectomy. Methods: A single-center retrospective review was performed for NSM patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction (2018-2024). Those who required TE/implant removal from surgical-site infection (SSI)/skin necrosis were included. SSI, skin necrosis, and adjusted nipple location were outcome variables. Results: The study included 192 NSM patients (342 TE/implants) who underwent implant-based reconstruction. Implant loss occurred in 8.5 % (29/342 TE/implants) with 5.0 % (17/342 TE/implants) from infection and 3.5 % (12/342 TE/implants) from skin necrosis. Secondary nipple adjustment was required in 41.2 % (7/17) who had infection and 41.7 % (5/12) who had skin necrosis. Salvage of TE/implants using NPWTi-d, and implant replacement while inpatient was performed in 7/17 patients with infection. No patients managed with NPWTi-d required secondary nipple correction. Conclusion: Nipple location may be preserved in nipple sparing mastectomy patients who receive NPWTi-d with faster reconstruction rates following infection compared to the control group. NPWTi-d may serve as a therapy adjunct in forming an algorithm following loss of a tissue expander.
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.