ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2020
Minimally invasive breast cancer excision using the breast lesion excision system under ultrasound guidance.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2020. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-inferiority of minimally invasive rotational cutting in granulomatous mastitis treatment: a comparative trial.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Potential role of vacuum-assisted procedures in resecting breast cancers and highlighting selection criteria to support future trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Minimally Invasive Excision of Breast Masses under Ultrasound Guidance: A Single Center's Five-Year Experience on the Breast Lesion Excision System.The breast journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the feasibility of completely excising small breast cancers using the automated, image-guided, single-pass radiofrequency-based breast lesion excision system (BLES) under ultrasound (US) guidance.
methodsFrom February 2018 to July 2019, 22 patients diagnosed with invasive carcinomas ≤ 15 mm at US and mammography were enrolled in this prospective, multi-center, ethics board-approved study. Patients underwent breast MRI to verify lesion size. BLES-based excision and surgery were performed during the same procedure. Histopathology findings from the BLES procedure and surgery were compared, and total excision findings were assessed.
resultsOf the 22 patients, ten were excluded due to the lesion being > 15 mm and/or being multifocal at MRI, and one due to scheduling issues. The remaining 11 patients underwent BLES excision. Mean diameter of excised lesions at MRI was 11.8 mm (range 8.0-13.9 mm). BLES revealed ten (90.9%) invasive carcinomas of no special type, and one (9.1%) invasive lobular carcinoma. Histopathological results were identical for the needle biopsy, BLES, and surgical specimens for all lesions. None of the BLES excisions were adequate. Margins were usually compromised on both sides of the specimen, indicating that the excised volume was too small. Margin assessment was good for all BLES specimens. One technical complication occurred (retrieval of an empty BLES basket, specimen retrieved during subsequent surgery).
conclusionsBLES allows accurate diagnosis of small invasive breast carcinomas. However, BLES cannot be considered as a therapeutic device for small invasive breast carcinomas due to not achieving adequate excision.
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.