ArticleGland surgery2026
Comparison of quality of life and complications after oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery and implant-based reconstruction for central breast cancer-a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Gland surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has traditionally been avoided for centrally located breast cancer due to concerns over oncologic safety and cosmetic outcomes, though advances in oncoplastic techniques have expanded its applicability. The aim of this study is to compare postoperative complications and quality of life between patients with centrally located breast cancer (CLBC) undergoing oncoplastic BCS and those undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with implant-based reconstruction. Methods: CLBC usually refers to tumors located in the area within 2 cm of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) including malignancies directly behind the nipple-areola area. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 130 patients treated for CLBC between March 2020 and September 2023. Among them, 98 underwent oncoplastic BCS, while 32 underwent NSMs with implant reconstruction. Inclusion criteria for the BCS group: absence of extensive calcifications or multiple lesions; tumor diameter ≤3 cm, allowing for the preservation of a favorable breast shape postoperatively; preoperative breast MRI demonstrating a tumor margin of at least 2 mm from the nipple. Inclusion criteria for the reconstruction group: unsuitability for or unwillingness to undergo BCS; medium or small breast size; mild or absent breast ptosis; presence of multiple or multicentric lesions precluding the achievement of satisfactory breast aesthetics with BCS. Postoperative quality of life was assessed six months after surgery using the Breast-Q questionnaire. Results: Compared to the BCS group, the reconstruction group had a higher proportion of non-ptotic, normal-shaped breasts (84.38% Conclusions: Nipple numbness and flap necrosis were more frequently observed in patients undergoing implant-based reconstruction. In contrast, those who underwent BCS reported greater breast satisfaction and sexual well-being. Oncoplasic BCS demonstrates potential advantages in preserving breast sensation, reducing surgical complications, and improving early quality of life.
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.