ArticleJournal of clinical imaging science2017
Initial Experience with a Cone-beam Breast Computed Tomography-guided Biopsy System.
Article in Journal of clinical imaging science, 2017. 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.
- Stereotactic Vacuum-Assisted Biopsy in Photon-Counting Dedicated Spiral Breast CT: A Proof of Concept.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2026Article
- Dedicated breast CT: state of the art-Part II. Clinical application and future outlook.European radiology · 2022Review
- Emerging Breast Imaging Technologies on the Horizon.Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate our initial experience with a cone-beam breast computed tomography (BCT)-guided breast biopsy system for lesion retrieval in phantom studies for use with a cone-beam BCT imaging system. MATERIALS AND
methodsUnder the Institutional Review Board approval, a phantom biopsy study was performed using a dedicated BCT-guided biopsy system. Fifteen biopsies were performed on each of the small, medium, and large anthropomorphic breast phantoms with both BCT and stereotactic guidance for comparison. Each set of the 45 phantoms contained masses and calcification clusters of varying sizes. Data included mass/calcium retrieval rate and dose and length of procedure time for phantom studies.
resultsPhantom mass and calcium retrieval rate were 100% for BCT and stereotactic biopsy. BCT dose for small and medium breast phantoms was found to be equivalent to or less than the corresponding stereotactic approach. Stereotactic-guided biopsy dose was 34.2 and 62.5 mGy for small and medium breast phantoms, respectively. BCT-guided biopsy dose was 15.4 and 30.0 mGy for small and medium breast phantoms, respectively. Both computed tomography biopsy and stereotactic biopsy study time ranged from 10 to 20 min.
conclusionInitial experience with a BCT-guided biopsy system has shown to be comparable to stereotactic biopsy in phantom studies with equivalent or decreased dose.
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.