ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2009
Surgical outcome of patients with core-biopsy-proven nonpalpable breast carcinoma: a large cohort follow-up study.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography with Digital Mammography in Assessing Tumor Size in 668 Cases of Breast Cancer.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the evaluation of breast suspicious calcifications: diagnostic accuracy and impact on surgical management.Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987) · 2019Article
- Radioguided occult lesion localisation versus wire-guided lumpectomy in the treatment of non-palpable breast lesions.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2013Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast-conserving surgery (BCS) is the preferred treatment for nonpalpable breast carcinoma. The outcome, however, may be disappointing. In this study surgical outcome in a large cohort of patients diagnosed with nonpalpable breast carcinoma is evaluated.
methodsIn 833 patients with 841 nonpalpable breast carcinomas the number of re-excisions and type of surgical procedures was calculated and summed per patient. Subsequently, the number of conversions to mastectomy and the number of days until complete tumor removal were analyzed. In a subgroup analysis the patients with an in situ carcinoma were compared with the patients with an invasive carcinoma.
resultsThe initial surgery consisted of BCS for 589 tumors (70%) and of mastectomy for 242 tumors (29%). For ten tumors (1%) the initial surgery was unknown. After BCS, 158/589 tumors (27%) required a re-excision: 116/337 (34%) for the in situ carcinomas and 63/504 (13%) for the invasive carcinomas (p = 0.0001). The number of conversions from BCS to mastectomy was 106/589 (18%): 66/241 (28%) in patients diagnosed with an in situ carcinoma versus 40/348 (11%) in patients with an invasive carcinoma (p = 0.0001). The median number of days until complete tumor removal was 28, being 38 days for the in situ carcinomas and 25 days for the invasive carcinomas (p = 0.0001).
conclusionsThere is room for improvement in the surgical treatment of nonpalpable breast carcinoma, especially the relatively favorable in situ carcinoma, as it requires significantly more excisions, mastectomies, conversions to mastectomy, and days for complete removal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.