ReviewJournal of biomedical optics2018
Review of methods for intraoperative margin detection for breast conserving surgery.
Review in Journal of biomedical optics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
66 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Intraoperative fluorescence imaging with aminolevulinic acid detects grossly occult breast cancer: a phase II randomized controlled trial.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2021Trial
- Specimen PET-CT Imaging for Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: The BrIMA Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.JAMA surgery · 2026Article
- Redefining Margin Assessment in Breast Conservation Surgery: Surgeon-Performed Intraoperative Ultrasound as a Reliable Alternative to Radiologic and Mammographic Assessment.European journal of breast health · 2026Article
- Imaging of Artificial Tumor Models in an Anatomical Breast Phantom with a Single-Sided Magnetic Particle Imaging Scanner.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Time-Resolved Fluorescence and Diffuse Reflectance (TRF-DR) Spectroscopy for Heterogeneous Breast Tissue Classification and Tumor Margin Assessment.Journal of biophotonics · 2026Article
- Article
- Improvement of DCIS resection using intraoperative imaging with ICG-p28.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diffuse reflectance and fluorescence spectroscopy for breast conserving surgery.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Article
- Real-time peri-operative microcalcification detection in superficial breast tissues.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Immunohistochemical Evaluation of Cathepsin B, L, and S Expression in Breast Cancer Patients.Molecular imaging and biology · 2024Article
- Polarimetry terahertz imaging of human breast cancer surgical specimens.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2024Article
- Ex vivo fluorescence-guided resection margin assessment in breast cancer surgery using a topically applied, cathepsin-activatable imaging agent.Pharmacological research · 2024Article
- The misunderstanding of the R Classification-a survey amongst medical specialties treating breast cancer.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024Article
- Deep learning-assisted low-cost autofluorescence microscopy for rapid slide-free imaging with virtual histological staining.Biomedical optics express · 2024Article
- Intraoperative Evaluation of Breast Tissues During Breast Cancer Operations Using the MasSpec Pen.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Artifact suppression for breast specimen imaging in micro CBCT using deep learning.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Review
- Breast-Conserving Surgery Margin Guidance Using Micro-Computed Tomography: Challenges When Imaging Radiodense Resection Specimens.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Breast conserving surgery (BCS) is an effective treatment for early-stage cancers as long as the margins of the resected tissue are free of disease according to consensus guidelines for patient management. However, 15% to 35% of patients undergo a second surgery since malignant cells are found close to or at the margins of the original resection specimen. This review highlights imaging approaches being investigated to reduce the rate of positive margins, and they are reviewed with the assumption that a new system would need high sensitivity near 95% and specificity near 85%. The problem appears to be twofold. The first is for complete, fast surface scanning for cellular, structural, and/or molecular features of cancer, in a lumpectomy volume, which is variable in size, but can be large, irregular, and amorphous. A second is for full, volumetric imaging of the specimen at high spatial resolution, to better guide internal radiologic decision-making about the spiculations and duct tracks, which may inform that surfaces are involved. These two demands are not easily solved by a single tool. Optical methods that scan large surfaces quickly are needed with cellular/molecular sensitivity to solve the first problem, but volumetric imaging with high spatial resolution for soft tissues is largely outside of the optical realm and requires x-ray, micro-CT, or magnetic resonance imaging if they can be achieved efficiently. In summary, it appears that a combination of systems into hybrid platforms may be the optimal solution for these two very different problems. This concept must be cost-effective, image specimens within minutes and be coupled to decision-making tools that help a surgeon without adding to the procedure. The potential for optical systems to be involved in this problem is emerging and clinical trials are underway in several of these technologies to see if they could reduce positive margin rates in BCS.
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.