Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42824436›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026

Optimizing the surgical paradigm for axillary osmidrosis: a retrospective cohort study integrating tumescent suction-curettage and direct-vision trimming.

Dan Zhang, Baoling Liang, Wei Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Dan ZhangDepartment of Cosmetology Plastic Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.
Baoling LiangDepartment of Breast Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.
Wei ZhangDepartment of Cosmetology Plastic Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Axillary osmidrosis (AO) is a distressing dermatological condition driven by a complex genetic and microbiological axis. While surgical extirpation of the hyperplastic apocrine glands remains a highly effective treatment, surgeons persistently face an anatomical dilemma: achieving extensive clearance often destroys the subdermal vascular plexus, leading to severe ischemia and scarring. This study comprehensively reviews the biomolecular etiology of AO and evaluates an optimized hybrid paradigm designed to effectively address this surgical dilemma. Methods: A retrospective cohort study included 86 patients with bilateral AO, comparing the modified technique by tumescent suction-curettage combined with direct-vision trimming with traditional small-incision resection. To elucidate the tissue-preserving biomechanics, the operative steps are illustrated utilizing a representative severe case (24-year-old female, Park Grade III). Efficacy, complications, and patient satisfaction at 6 months postoperatively were analyzed. Results: The total effective rate was 97.67% in the modified group and 95.35% in the traditional group, demonstrating no statistically significant difference in clinical efficacy ( Conclusion: By synergizing atraumatic negative-pressure defatting to safeguard microcirculation with direct-vision trimming to eliminate surgical blind spots, the modified technique achieves comparable efficacy to traditional surgery while minimizing morbidities. It translates fundamental biomolecular mechanisms into a highly reproducible clinical surgical option.

Indexed as

apocrine glandsaxillary osmidrosisminimally invasive surgerysubdermal vascular plexussuction-curettage

Identifiers

PMID42824436
PMCPMC13627367

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.