Endoscopic vs Conventional Mastectomy for Breast Cancer Wound Complications
Summary
NIH's ClinicalTrials.gov has registered a new randomized, open-label study comparing endoscopic skin-sparing mastectomy (E-SSM) with conventional mastectomy (CM) in 258 female patients with unilateral invasive breast cancer (T1-4aN0-3M0). The trial will enroll 129 participants per arm across multiple centers and randomize by site, with primary endpoints including postoperative wound complications and patient satisfaction. This registry entry documents the trial's design, eligibility criteria (breast volume ≤ cup C, grade I-II ptosis), and dual interventions.
“This randomized, open-label study compares endoscopic skin-sparing mastectomy (E-SSM) with conventional mastectomy (CM) in female patients with unilateral invasive breast cancer (T1-4aN0-3M0).”
About this source
ClinicalTrials.gov is the NIH-run registry of every clinical trial conducted in the United States, plus most international trials sponsored by US-based companies or institutions. By federal law, sponsors must register Phase 2 through Phase 4 studies before enrolling patients and post results within a year of completion. This feed tracks every new trial registration and study update, around 700 a month: drug interventions, device studies, behavioral protocols, observational research. Watch this if you scout drug candidates moving into mid or late-stage development, monitor competitor pipelines, or follow rare disease research where new trials signal patient hope. GovPing parses sponsor, phase, intervention, and target indication on each entry.
What changed
This ClinicalTrials.gov registry entry documents a newly registered randomized clinical trial (NCT07548762) comparing endoscopic skin-sparing mastectomy with conventional mastectomy for breast cancer. The study will enroll 258 female participants across multiple centers, randomized equally between the two surgical approaches. Primary outcomes include postoperative wound complications and patient satisfaction; secondary outcomes include breast appearance and oncological safety.
For healthcare providers and clinical investigators, this registry entry signals an emerging comparative-effectiveness study in breast cancer surgery that may inform future surgical practice guidelines. Facilities with breast cancer surgery programs should note the specific patient eligibility criteria (T1-4aN0-3M0 staging, breast volume ≤ cup C, grade I-II ptosis) when considering patient referrals or internal practice alignment.
Archived snapshot
Apr 24, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
Endoscopic Skin-Sparing vs. Conventional Mastectomy for Wound Complications in BC
N/A NCT07548762 Kind: NA Apr 23, 2026
Abstract
This randomized, open-label study compares endoscopic skin-sparing mastectomy (E-SSM) with conventional mastectomy (CM) in female patients with unilateral invasive breast cancer (T1-4aN0-3M0). The primary objective is to evaluate differences in postoperative wound complications and patient satisfaction, with secondary outcomes including breast appearance and oncological safety.
Eligible patients have a breast volume ≤ cup C and no/mild ptosis (grade I-II). A total of 258 participants (129 per group) will be enrolled across multiple centers and randomized by site.
This study aims to provide evidence for selecting optimal endoscopic surgical strategies, address the evidence gap for E-SSM without immediate reconstruction, and advance the precision of breast cancer surgery.
Conditions: Breast Cancer
Interventions: Endoscopic skin-sparing mastectomy, Conventional mastectomy
Mentioned entities
Related changes
Get daily alerts for ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Source
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from NIH.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when ClinicalTrials.gov Studies publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.