ArticleWorld journal of surgery2026
De-Epithelialization Using Scalpel Versus Monopolar Electrocautery Cutting in Reduction Mammoplasty: A Prospective Comparative Study.
Article in World journal of 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReduction mammoplasty for symptomatic macromastia provides meaningful relief from musculoskeletal pain, postural strain, and functional limitations. A critical step in the procedure is pedicle de-epithelialization, traditionally performed using a scalpel. Although effective, scalpel de-epithelialization can be time-intensive, prompting evaluation of alternative techniques such as monopolar electrocautery. Other sharp techniques include curved-scissor de-epithelialization, en bloc removal, and pedicle deskinning. Monopolar techniques utilize either a conventional blade electrode or a Colorado needle tip. This study compares surgical outcomes between scalpel and monopolar electrocautery de-epithelialization.
methodsA prospective, intra-patient comparative study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, Alexandria Faculty of Medicine, between October 2023 and April 2025. Patients with symptomatic macromastia undergoing bilateral reduction mammoplasty received scalpel de-epithelialization on the right breast and monopolar electrocautery on the left. Follow-up assessments occurred at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and monthly thereafter for up to 12 months. The primary outcome was de-epithelialization time. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative blood loss and pain both postoperatively and at 6 months. Statistical analyses included paired t-tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and McNemar's tests.
resultsSixty patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammoplasty were included. Monopolar electrocautery demonstrated a significantly shorter mean de-epithelialization time compared to the scalpel (5.07 ± 0.88 minutes vs. 10.87 ± 1.93 minutes; p < 0.001). Intraoperative blood loss was also significantly lower with monopolar electrocautery (139.1 ± 20.64 mL vs. 176.7 ± 16.06 mL; p < 0.001). At 6 months, BREAST-Q breast pain scores were modestly lower with the monopolar technique (p = 0.046). Rates of postoperative complications and patient satisfaction were comparable between techniques.
conclusionsMonopolar electrocautery significantly reduced de-epithelialization time, the primary outcome of this study. It was also associated with lower intraoperative blood loss. Although modestly lower breast pain scores were observed at 6 months, the difference was small, and its clinical importance remains uncertain. The study was not powered to evaluate postoperative complication rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42745535What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.