The symmetry and morphological integrity of the breast has an unspoken psychological effect on every individual in the real world. For breast cancer patients, the traditional surgical procedure is modified radical surgery, which requires complete removal of the affected breast. This has caused a variety of problems for many patients and families. With the gradual application of breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer, it has become possible to keep the appearance of the breast intact. However, if the extent of excision is reduced, will it not be clean? Will there be recurrence? Will it be shortened in terms of survival? The reported study at the Global Breast Cancer Conference in San Antonio on December 9, 2015 gave very positive results. At 10-year follow-up, breast-conserving surgery combined with radiotherapy was instead superior to mastectomy A retrospective study of more than 37,000 patients in the Netherlands with 10-year follow-up confirmed that breast-conserving treatment (extended tumor resection combined with radiotherapy) may be a superior treatment option to mastectomy. Compared to mastectomy, the relative risk of death at 10 years was reduced by nearly 20% with breast-conserving treatment; 10-year overall survival was also improved (76.8% vs. 59.7%), independent of breast tumor size (T1 and T2) and lymph node status (N0 and N1). Sabine Siesling from the Netherlands Advanced Cancer Organization reported that one of the importance of the study is that it provides 10-year follow-up information. Most recent observational studies, while also showing a survival benefit of breast-conserving treatment, only have 5-year follow-up results, which is too short for breast cancer. The important message of this study is that if feasible, breast-conserving therapy should be the first choice for breast cancer surgery, especially for patients with smaller tumors. Breast-conserving surgery is fine as long as the margins are clean! A large retrospective cohort study of 11,900 patients from Denmark showed that a negative margin, no matter how small, is sufficient for patients with invasive breast cancer who undergo breast-conserving surgery. The risk of ipsilateral breast recurrence after breast-conserving surgery was similar for patients with large (2-4 mm) and small (0-1 mm) negative margins, and there was no difference in overall survival. The risk of ipsilateral breast recurrence at 5 and 9 years after surgery was 2.4% and 5.9% for the overall population, respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of ipsilateral breast recurrence between any negative margin distance in any population subgroup as long as the margins were negative; however, the rate of ipsilateral breast recurrence was 2.5-fold higher in patients with positive margins. In conclusion, more and more studies on breast-conserving surgery reveal the safety and feasibility of breast-conserving surgery, which will surely replace traditional mastectomy gradually and bring better quality of survival for breast cancer patients.