ArticleAsia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology2018
Assessment of Ultrasound / Radio-guided Occult Lesion Localization in Non-palpable Breast Lesions.
Article in Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of wire-guided localization (WGL) and radio-guided occult lesion localization (ROLL) in localization of non-palpable breast lesions.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesControversy exists about the localization of non-palpable breast lesions. In many countries, the gold standard for the diagnosis of these lesions is needle localization due to its accuracy. This study sought to compare the ultrasound- and radio-guided occult lesion localization (ROLL) as a simple method with the conventional procedures in terms of their diagnostic power.
methodsThis study was conducted on 94 patients with non-palpable breast lesions detected by ultrasonography and localized by the combination of ultrasonography and using radiopharmaceuticals. One to ten hours prior to surgery, 0.1-0.2 ml (equivalent to 0.5-1 mCi) of Tc-99m-phytate was injected to the lesion under the guidance of ultrasonography. Then, the lesion was localized using a hand-held gamma probe, and excision of the lesion was performed according to its radioactivity signal. Data analysis was performed using SPSS, version 16.
resultsBenign and malignant pathologic results were observed in 77 (81.9%) and 17(18.1%) of the patients, respectively, and the mean volume of the excised tissue was 26.29±27 mm³. 79 patients had a solitary lesion (84%), 55 in the left breast (58.5%) and 39 in superolateral quadrant (41.5%). The mean size of the lesions was 15.7 mm in diameter (ranging from 4 to 34 mm). Additionally, there was a need to secondary surgery in 3 (3.2%) patients and inappropriate localization in 6 (6.4%) patients (subcutaneous or intra-ductal spread of radiodrug).
conclusionCombination of ultrasound- and radio-guided localization methods for localizing non-palpable breast lesions is a simple and acceptable method for localization with no significant complications. For radio-drug spread and subsequent excessive excised tissue volume, subcutaneous and intra-ductal lesions are not suitable indication for ROLL.
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.