Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29201278›Full record

ReviewCurrent breast cancer reports2017

Axillary Nodal Staging with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.

Nisha Sharma, Karina Cox

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current breast cancer reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Study on Sentinel Lymph Node and Its Lymphatic Drainage Pattern of Breast Cancer by Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Correlation between the contrast-enhanced ultrasound image features and axillary lymph node metastasis of primary breast cancer and its diagnostic value.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
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

2 authors.

Nisha SharmaBreast Unit, Level 1 Chancellor Wing, St James Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF UK.
Karina CoxDepartment of Breast Surgery, Maidstone Hospital, Hermitage Lane, Maidstone, Kent ME16 9QQ UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAxillary staging in the context of breast cancer is a contentious topic due to the varied practices across UK, Europe, and America. The ACOSOG Z0011 trial has questioned the role of axillary ultrasound in women with breast cancer. Published data has shown that women with ultrasound-positive lymph nodes have a worse prognosis than those with ultrasound-negative lymph nodes. Axillary ultrasound is limited as the sentinel lymph node (SLN) cannot be identified using B-mode ultrasound; however, with the advent of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), this has now changed. RECENT

findingsThe published literature has shown that the sentinel lymph node can be identified using CEUS. The rates are equivalent to blue dye alone but currently inferior to the dual technique of sentinel lymph node biopsy. There are several different contrast agents that can be used and the agents that remain in the sentinel lymph node for longer can identify areas of poor enhancement, allowing for targeted biopsy. SUMMARY: CEUS has the potential to revolutionize the way we manage the axilla in the future and may even replace surgical staging.

Indexed as

AxillaAxillary surgeryAxillary ultrasoundBreast cancerContrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)Sentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID29201278
PMCPMC5694501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.