Observational studyLangenbeck's archives of surgery2026
Cosmetic outcomes of oncoplastic surgeries in breast cancer patients: an eleven-year experience from two tertiary referral centers.
Observational study in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOncoplastic surgery (OPS) is an essential component of breast cancer treatment, aiming to achieve optimal aesthetic outcomes while ensuring oncological safety. However, evidence comparing the cosmetic outcomes of various OPS techniques remains limited. This study evaluates the aesthetic results of OPS procedures in breast cancer patients.
methodsThis observational study included 494 breast cancer patients who underwent different OPS techniques. Six months post-radiotherapy, cosmetic outcomes were assessed using the Harvard scale by an expert committee. Additionally, a plastic surgeon evaluated outcomes using an objective scoring system. Various surgeon-reported aesthetic parameters were analysed.
resultsCosmetic outcomes were assessed using two scoring systems. The median cosmetic score for both type I and type II OPS was 8. However, in the first quartile, type II OPS scored one point lower than type I OPS. Based on the Harvard scale, the distribution of "excellent," "good," and "fair" ratings was 58.4%, 38.4%, and 3.2% for type I surgery, and 48.2%, 46.3%, and 5.4% for type II surgery, respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.124). The round block, lateral perforator flap, bilateral mammoplasty, and racquet techniques demonstrated superior cosmetic outcomes compared to the batwing technique (P < 0.05). A significant association was found between nipple-areolar complex position and OPS technique (P = 0.013).
conclusionThe surgical algorithm used in this study facilitated acceptable aesthetic outcomes regardless of tumor size and location. Among type II OPS techniques, the round block approach yielded the highest cosmetic ratings, while the batwing technique produced the least favorable results.
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.