ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Comparison of Circumareolar Mastopexy for Gynecomastia with a Semicircular Incision.
Review in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA circumareolar approach to treat gynecomastia has received renewed attention. However, this method has been associated with areolar deformities. A "blocking" suture is recommended to limit areolar dilation. A semicircular incision along the lower areolar margin is a popular alternative approach.
methodsAn electronic literature review identified publications on circumareolar mastopexies for gynecomastia treatment. Clinical data were assessed, including complications. Published images from the literature were matched and areolar diameters were compared before and after surgery. A cohort of consecutive patients from the author's practice, treated with a semicircular incision, were similarly evaluated.
resultsSixteen publications included photographs that could be measured. There was no significant difference in the mean areolar diameter after surgery on either side. Complications included areolar noncircularity, widening, hypertrophic scars, nipple/areola numbness, and persistent pleating. Among 32 patients treated with a semicircular incision and subcutaneous mastectomy, along with liposuction, the mean postoperative areolar diameter was significantly reduced after surgery, by 0.2 cm on the right side and 0.3 cm on the left side. No complications of the nipple/areola complex were encountered and no areolar revisions were needed.
conclusionsThe concept of a blocking suture holds an intuitive appeal. However, the evidence does not support this practice. A circumareolar approach to gynecomastia treatment is associated with a high rate of areolar deformities. The thin tissues are intolerant of tension. Large, permanent sutures are often palpable and require later removal. Areolar scar revisions are common. A purse-string suture does not prevent areolar widening postoperatively back to the preoperative diameter. By contrast, an approach using an incision limited to the lower areolar margin avoids areolar deformities, the need for revisions, and produces results that consistently appear natural. When combined with liposuction, skin contraction can provide a significant, albeit modest, reduction in areolar diameter LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41491326What 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.