ArticleThe British journal of radiology2015
Effects on short-term quality of life of vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is 9-G DBT-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy Sufficient to Completely Remove T1 Breast Cancers (below 20 mm)? Analysis of 146 Patients with Histology as Reference Standard.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Breast ultrasound: automated or hand-held? Exploring patients' experience and preference.European radiology experimental · 2020Article
- 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effects of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT)-guided and digital mammography (MMx)-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) on short-term quality of life (QoL).
methodsFrom November 2014 through March 2015, females undergoing VABB in an academic medical centre participated in a survey after biopsy. VABB was performed under DBT (Group 1) or MMx guidance (Group 2). Biopsy experience was assessed with a modified testing morbidities index (TMI). 10 attributes were assessed: six related to the procedures (pain or discomfort before and during testing, fear or anxiety before and during testing, physical and mental function after testing) and four not related to the procedures (familiarity for cancer and clinical history, embarrassment during testing and overall satisfaction). Non-parametric standard statistics were used to compare data of Group 1 and data of Group 2.
resultsA total of 90 females (mean age, 55.8 years; range, 40-87 years) were enrolled: 45 underwent DBT-VABB and 45 MMx-VABB. The sum of the 6 of 10 items related to the procedures was significantly worse for DBT (p < 0.02), but no differences were observed for the single items. The median value for DBT-VABB and MMx-VABB was 95.2 and 90.1, respectively (p < 0.02). The 4 of 10 TMI items not related to the procedures did not differ significantly between the two groups. Four females fainted during DBT-VABB and three females during MMx-VABB; all of these patients underwent VABB procedures in sitting position.
conclusionFemales in the DBT-VABB study group have a decreased short-term QoL compared with the MMx-VABB group. DBT-VABBs were less tolerated than MMx-VABBs. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: DBT-VABB was less tolerated than MMx-VABB. Females in the DBT-VABB study group had a decreased short-term QoL compared with the MMx-VABB group. Overall satisfaction was similar for both procedures.
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.