ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Early Oncologic Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Propensity Score-Matching Analysis.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) was developed to minimize visible scarring and improve the quality of life in patients with breast cancer. However, despite its increasing adoption, evidence regarding its oncologic outcomes remains sparse. This study aimed to compare the oncologic outcomes of R-NSM and conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent NSM with immediate breast reconstruction for breast cancer between 2019 and 2022. Risk-reducing cases were excluded. R-NSM and C-NSM groups were compared after propensity score matching using a nearest-neighbor algorithm, matching each patient in the R-NSM group to up to five controls without replacement.
resultsBefore matching, the R-NSM group more frequently had hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative tumors, lower Ki-67 indices, and no neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After propensity score matching, most clinicopathologic variables were well balanced between groups. During a median follow-up of 37.5 months for R-NSM and 42.6 months for C-NSM, no locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, or death occurred in the R-NSM group, whereas all seven recurrences (3.5%) occurred in the C-NSM group. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant differences in locoregional recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, or disease-free survival between groups, although all observed oncologic events occurred in the C-NSM group.
conclusionR-NSM demonstrated oncologic outcomes comparable to those of C-NSM, with no recurrence or mortality despite a sufficiently long follow-up. These findings support R-NSM as a feasible and oncologically sound surgical option for appropriately selected patients with early-stage breast cancer.
Identifiers
42218349What 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.