SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Single-port robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Single-port robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (SPRNSM) has emerged as an innovative minimally invasive alternative to conventional and multi-port robotic techniques, aiming to improve cosmetic outcomes while maintaining oncologic safety. This systematic review evaluates the feasibility, safety, and current evidence supporting SPRNSM. A systematic search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted from database inception to July 4, 2026. Studies involving adult women undergoing SPRNSM for therapeutic or prophylactic indications were included. Both clinical and cadaveric studies reporting relevant outcomes were eligible. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Risk of bias was appraised using the ROBINS-I tool. Due to heterogeneity, results were synthesized narratively. Sixteen studies were included, comprising seven retrospective studies, one prospective study, five case reports, two case series, and one cadaveric study. SPRNSM was technically feasible across all studies, with no reported conversions to conventional surgery. Operative times were significantly longer than conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (mean differences of 54-70 min) but comparable to multi-port robotic approaches. Grade III or higher complications ranged from 1.8% to 20%, with reoperation rates from 1.4% to 7.5%. Nipple-areolar complex necrosis rates were consistently low (1.2%-2.5%) and patient-reported satisfaction and sensory preservation were favorable. Short-term oncological outcomes appeared comparable to conventional techniques, although follow-up was limited to a maximum of 36 months. Overall risk of bias was serious for 80% of clinical studies. Current evidence suggests that SPRNSM is a feasible and safe procedure with potential cosmetic and functional advantages. However, the evidence base is limited by predominantly retrospective designs, small sample sizes, selection bias toward high-volume centers, and short follow-up, preventing definitive conclusions regarding long-term oncologic safety. SPRNSM represents a promising evolution in minimally invasive breast surgery; however, until long-term oncologic data become available, its use should remain limited to controlled settings and prospective trials. Ongoing randomized trials are expected to provide higher-level evidence in the coming years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42557447What 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.