Fibroadenoma of the breast is a common disease in young women and its treatment is mainly surgical. Very few patients need to be hospitalized for surgery under general anesthesia, but most patients can be operated under local anesthesia on an outpatient basis. The latter takes less time, does not require hospitalization (30 minutes), is less expensive (more than 900), and is economically simple, although the disadvantage is that the surgical scar is larger and does not meet the growing demand for beauty among women. In recent years, ultrasound-guided mammoplasty (referred to as McMurdo surgery, commonly known as minimally invasive breast surgery) has become increasingly popular, and here is a simple comparison of traditional open surgery and minimally invasive surgery. 1, traditional open surgery wound is larger, the general wound size is slightly larger than the cut swelling, after surgery some patients may not be satisfied with the recovery of the incision due to physical reasons, resulting in a more obvious wound, affecting the aesthetics; minimally invasive surgery incision is smaller, about 5mm, and can choose a more concealed area into the needle, most patients are satisfied with the recovery, no obvious wound left after surgery, can meet the needs of women’s friends to beauty. Needs. 2. Traditional open surgery is difficult to deal with multiple swellings that are far away because an incision is made in the skin above each swelling, which is very damaging to the beauty of the breast; minimally invasive surgery only opens a small incision and can remove multiple swellings in one operation under ultrasound guidance. 3.Traditional open surgery requires the surgeon to perform palpation and positioning, so it is difficult to remove the swelling with deep location and small swelling that is difficult to reach; while minimally invasive surgery can remove the small swelling with deep location and difficult to reach by performing ultrasound positioning during surgery. 4.Traditional surgery also has certain advantages, mainly the price is cheap, about 900+; while minimally invasive surgery is expensive, more than 5000 for unilateral swellings and sometimes more than 10000 for bilateral swellings, and most of the costs are self-financed and not reimbursable. 5. For the swelling around the areola, minimally invasive surgery is difficult to operate, easy to damage the skin and bleed more during the operation; while traditional surgery is convenient to remove and the damage to the milk ducts is small during the operation, so traditional surgery is mainly considered in such cases. Moreover, the suture technology of modern medicine has made great progress, especially our department carries out transareolar incision to remove the mass and then continuous intracutaneous cosmetic suturing, and the incision is not obvious in most patients after recovery. 6. For some very superficial masses that are very close to the skin, minimally invasive surgery tends to damage the skin and cause relatively more damage to the milk ducts; whereas traditional surgery is simple to remove and causes relatively less damage to the milk ducts. In this case, young patients who are not breastfeeding are more suitable for traditional surgery. 7. For large masses over 3 cm, the residual rate of minimally invasive surgery will increase and the intraoperative bleeding will be larger; while traditional surgery is thorough and satisfactory in removing and stopping bleeding, so traditional surgery is preferred. The above is a brief comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of traditional surgery and minimally invasive surgery. I hope that patients will have a simple understanding of the differences between the two, but when it comes to the specific situation of which surgery to choose, you should listen to the professional doctor’s advice, and then combine your needs and make your own decision.