Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21847541›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2012

Magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative assessment of patients with primary breast cancer: systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and meta-analysis.

María Nieves Plana, Carmen Carreira, Alfonso Muriel, Miguel Chiva, Víctor Abraira, Jose Ignacio Emparanza, Xavier Bonfill, Javier Zamora

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 236 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Integrated [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

María Nieves PlanaClinical Biostatistics Unit. Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP) and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Ctra. Colmenar km 9, 100 28034 Madrid, Spain.
Carmen Carreira
Alfonso Muriel
Miguel Chiva
Víctor Abraira
Jose Ignacio Emparanza
Xavier Bonfill
Javier Zamora
Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública · ESHospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada · ESHospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal · ESBiogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo estimate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting additional lesions and contralateral cancer not identified using conventional imaging in primary breast cancer.

methodsWe have conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to estimate diagnostic accuracy indices and the impact of MRI on surgical management.

resultsFifty articles were included (n = 10,811 women). MRI detected additional disease in 20% of women and in the contralateral breast in 5.5%. The summary PPV of ipsilateral additional disease was 67% (95% CI 59-74%). For contralateral breast, the PPV was 37% (95% CI 27-47%). For ipsilateral lesions, MRI devices ≥1.5 Tesla (T) had higher PPV (75%, 95% CI 64-83%) than MRI with <1.5 T (59%, 95% CI 53-71%). Similar results were found for contralateral cancer, PPV 40% (95% CI 29-53%) and 19% (95% CI 8-39%) for high- and low-field equipments, respectively. True positive MRI findings prompted conversion from wide local excision (WLE) to more extensive surgery in 12.8% of women while in 6.3% this conversion was inappropriate.

conclusionsMRI shows high diagnostic accuracy, but MRI findings should be pathologically verified because of the high FP rate. Future research on this emerging technology should focus on patient outcome as the primary end-point.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPreoperative PeriodBreastBreast NeoplasmsFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Second PrimaryNeoplasm StagingPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID21847541
OpenAlexW1978791903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.