• 1. Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
  • 2. Breast Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
DU Zhenggui, Email: docduzg@163.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective To compare the differences in surgical efficiency, surgical safety, aesthetic outcomes, and oncological safety between axillary single-incision endocsopic breast-conserving surgery (ASIEBS) and conventional open breast-conserving surgery (COBS), and to evaluate the clinical value of ASILBCS based on the “HUAXI hole 3” technique. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted on the clinicopathologic data of patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer at West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2021 to September 2024. The patients were assigned into an ASILBCS group and a COBS group based on the surgical approach. Both groups received standardized surgical treatment and postoperative follow-up. The observation indicators included baseline characteristics, intraoperative data, postoperative complications, aesthetic outcome (by Ueda score and Harris score evaluation), and oncological safety (local recurrence and distant metastasis). Results A total of 67 patients were enrolled, with 41 in the ASIEBS group and 26 in the COBS group. There was no statistically significant differences in the comparison of other baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05), except for the proportions of patients with diabetes mellitus and those positive for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (P<0.05). The ASIEBS group showed superior aesthetic outcomes compared to the COBS group (Ueda score: P=0.013; Harris score: P=0.047). However, the ASIEBS group had higher median total hospitalization costs (12 779.00 yuan vs. 12 354.50 yuan, Z=–2.16, P=0.03). The median follow-up time was 31.43 months in the ASIEBS group and 21.20 months in the COBS group (Z=–2.36, P=0.02). During follow-up, only one patient with local recurrence occurred in the ASIEBS group, and no distant metastasis or death event was observed in both groups. Conclusion The ASIEBS based on the “HUAXI hole 3” technique is comparable to COBS in terms of surgical efficiency, surgical safety, and oncological safety, while offering superior aesthetic outcomes.

Citation: LI Tianyuan, XIE Yanyan, WU Hao, ZHU Zhongjian, DU Zhenggui. Comparative study of axillary single-incision endoscopic breast-conserving surgery and conventional open breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. CHINESE JOURNAL OF BASES AND CLINICS IN GENERAL SURGERY, 2025, 32(3): 282-287. doi: 10.7507/1007-9424.202503013 Copy

Copyright © the editorial department of CHINESE JOURNAL OF BASES AND CLINICS IN GENERAL SURGERY of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved

  • Previous Article

    Chinese expert consensus on postoperative follow-up for non-small cell lung cancer (version 2025)
  • Next Article

    One-stage prosthetic reconstruction after endoscopic radical mastectomy for breast cancer: a safety analysis of day surgery