ArticleLa Radiologia medica2020
Comparison between execution and reading time of 3D ABUS versus HHUS.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Establishment of prediction model for breast lesion using automated breast ultrasound system.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Semiautomated segmentation of breast tumor on automatic breast ultrasound image using a large-scale model with customized modules.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- 3-D breast nodule detection on automated breast ultrasound using faster region-based convolutional neural networks and U-Net.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Evaluating Efficiency of Time Use and Operational Costs in a Breast Clinic Workflow: A Comparative Analysis Between Automated Breast Ultrasound and Handheld Ultrasound.European journal of breast health · 2023Article
- A Prospective Comparative Evaluation of Handheld Ultrasound Examination (HHUS) or Automated Ultrasound Examination (ABVS) in Women with Dense Breast.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparison between two packages for pectoral muscle removal on mammographic images.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- Structured reporting of x-ray mammography in the first diagnosis of breast cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- A Review of Breast Imaging for Timely Diagnosis of Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
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
backgroundBreast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. Mammography is supplemented with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) to increase sensitivity. Automatic breast ultrasound (ABUS) is an alternative to HHUS. Our study wanted to assess the difference in execution and reading time between ABUS and HHUS. METHODS AND MATERIALS: N = 221 women were evaluated consecutively between January 2019 and June 2019 (average age 53 years; range 24-89). The execution and reading time of ABUS and HHUS was calculated with an available stopwatch. Time started for both procedures when the patient was ready on the examination table to be examined to the end of image acquisition and interpretation.
resultsNo patients interrupted the exam due to pain or discomfort. N = 221 women underwent ABUS and HHUS; N = 11 patients refused to undergo both procedures due to time constraints and refused ABUS; therefore, 210 patients were enrolled with both ABUS and HHUS available. The average time to perform and read the exam was 5 min for HHUS (DS ± 1.5) with a maximum time of 11 min and a minimum of 2 min. The average time with ABUS was 17 min (DS ± 3.8, with a maximum time of 31 min and a minimum time of 9 min). The ABUS technique took longer to be performed in all patients, with an average difference of 11 min (range 3-23 min) per patient, P < 0,001. Separating ABUS execution from reading time we highlighted as ABUS execution is more time-consuming respect HHUS. In addition, we can underline that time required by radiologists is longer for ABUS even only considering the interpretation time of the exam.
conclusionA significant difference was observed in the execution and reading time of the two exams, where the HHUS method was more rapid and tolerated.
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.