ReviewGland surgery2026
Why pay more for robot in breast surgery: literature review and analysis of costs.
Review in Gland surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) has emerged as a novel surgical approach in breast cancer treatment, suggesting advantages in cosmetic outcomes, ergonomic performance, and surgical outcomes. Despite its growing adoption, the high costs associated with robotic systems have raised concerns about its financial sustainability. This review aims to assess the clinical benefits, economic implications, and cost-effectiveness of R-NSM compared to conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM), using both current literature and real-world data from a high-volume cancer center. Methods: A comprehensive narrative review was conducted, utilizing PubMed and Google Scholar to identify relevant publications up to March 31, 2025. Search terms included "Robotic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy", "R-NSM", "Conventional NSM", "Surgical outcomes", "Cost analysis", and "Healthcare economics". No language restrictions were applied. Institutional cost data and national procurement records were incorporated to contextualize economic findings. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by multiple authors with consensus resolution. Key Content and Findings: The review explores surgical outcomes, oncologic safety and patient satisfaction, related to economic factors of R-NSM. Evidence shows R-NSM is non-inferior to C-NSM regarding safety and may reduce complications such as nipple necrosis, and the need of subsequent surgical interventions. Patients report improved cosmetic and psychosocial outcomes. However, R-NSM adds an average of €3,700-€4,000 per case, largely due to extended operative time and higher disposable instrument costs. These costs align with international data. Institutional volume, shared robotic platforms, and potential reductions in secondary procedures may help offset expenses over time. Conclusions: R-NSM offers promising benefits in terms of patient outcomes and surgical precision, but its widespread adoption hinges on economic feasibility. Transparent reporting is crucial to inform practice. Institutions must weigh costs against clinical value, with broader adoption likely influenced by surgical expertise, reimbursement models, and evolving technology. Future quality-adjusted life year (QALY)-based cost-utility analyses and multinational studies will be essential to define its role in breast cancer surgery.
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.