ArticleJournal of plastic and reconstructive surgery2026
Circumareolar Skin Reduction versus Long Scar in Surgical Treatment of High-Grade Gynecomastia.
Article in Journal of plastic and reconstructive 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the surgical treatment of gynecomastia using circumareolar excision versus transverse skin excision. Methods: Thirty-six male patients with unilateral or bilateral gynecomastia participated in this prospective randomized study at our institution. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A received circumareolar skin excision, and group B received transverse skin excision. Patients were evaluated for surgical and postoperative complications, patient satisfaction, and cosmetic outcomes. Results: There were no intraoperative complications or blood transfusions. The average operative time was 150 minutes for group A and 110 minutes for group B. Hospital stays ranged from one to two days. Both groups had a 5.56% incidence of hemostasis-related issues and wound infections. Seromas appeared in 11.11% of cases and resolved spontaneously. Wound dehiscence was observed in 16.67% of group A and 5.56% of group B, with no statistically significant difference. Hypertrophic scars occurred in 16.67% of group B, while none were reported in group A (p = 0.07). Conclusions: The circumareolar technique requires longer surgical time and may lead to a less optimal chest contour. However, it provides superior cosmetic results for the nipple-areola complex. Both techniques demonstrate comparable rates of postoperative complications.
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.