<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>159(10)</volume><submitter>Kim JH</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Importance&lt;/h4>While nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for breast cancer was only performed using the open method in the past, its frequency using endoscopic and robotic surgical instruments has been increasing rapidly. However, there are limited studies regarding postoperative complications and the benefits and drawbacks of minimal access NSM (M-NSM) compared with conventional NSM (C-NSM).&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To examine the differences in postoperative complications between C-NSM and M-NSM.&lt;h4>Design, setting, participants&lt;/h4>This was a retrospective multicenter cohort study enrolling 1583 female patients aged 19 years and older with breast cancer who underwent NSM at 21 university hospitals in Korea between January 2018 and December 2020. Those with mastectomy without preserving the nipp</pubmed_abstract><journal>JAMA surgery</journal><pagination>1177-1186</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC11325243</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Minimal Access vs Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC11325243</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Lee JE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Korea Robot-endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kim KS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Park HS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chang YW</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kang YJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kim JY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Son NH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Choi JE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nam SE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kim MK</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Shin HJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee MH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kwon SU</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Choi HJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee HY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee SB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bae SJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Choi YJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ryu JM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kim JH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kim Z</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ko BS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Cha C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Park E</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Minimal Access vs Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.</name><description>&lt;h4>Importance&lt;/h4>While nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for breast cancer was only performed using the open method in the past, its frequency using endoscopic and robotic surgical instruments has been increasing rapidly. However, there are limited studies regarding postoperative complications and the benefits and drawbacks of minimal access NSM (M-NSM) compared with conventional NSM (C-NSM).&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To examine the differences in postoperative complications between C-NSM and M-NSM.&lt;h4>Design, setting, participants&lt;/h4>This was a retrospective multicenter cohort study enrolling 1583 female patients aged 19 years and older with breast cancer who underwent NSM at 21 university hospitals in Korea between January 2018 and December 2020. Those with mastectomy without preserving the nipp</description><dates><release>2024-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2024 Oct</publication><modification>2026-06-03T23:03:38.536Z</modification><creation>2025-04-04T02:43:32.139Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC11325243</accession><cross_references><pubmed>39141399</pubmed><doi>10.1001/jamasurg.2024.2977</doi></cross_references></HashMap>