Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32916007›Full record

ArticleVeterinary surgery : VS2021

Diagnostic accuracy of optical coherence tomography for assessing surgical margins of canine soft tissue sarcomas in observers of different specialties.

Josephine A Dornbusch, Laura E Selmic, Pin-Chieh Huang, Jonathan P Samuelson, Eric M McLaughlin, Vincent A Wavreille, Jessica A Ogden, Brittany Abrams, Alex Kalamaras, Eric Green and 11 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary surgery : VS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Scar revision for incompletely or narrowly excised soft tissue sarcomas in dogs.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

21 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Josephine A DornbuschDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5445-5973
Laura E SelmicDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6695-6273
Pin-Chieh HuangBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Jonathan P SamuelsonDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Eric M McLaughlinCenter for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Vincent A WavreilleDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Jessica A OgdenDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Brittany AbramsDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Alex KalamarasDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Eric GreenDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Eric T HostnikDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Lincoln EveryDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Jason A FuerstDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Ryan JenningsDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Christopher PremanandanDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Joshua N LorbachDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Sarah C LinnDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, Ohio.
Aneesh AlexBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Janet E SorrellsBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Lingxiao YangBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Stephen A BoppartBeckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
The Ohio State University · USUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

The Ohio State University Center for clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001070 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2013 to 2017
$22.6M
Intraoperative Polarization-Sensitive OCT for Assessing Breast Tumor MarginsR01CA213149 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN · PI BOPPART, STEPHEN A · 2017 to 2021
$2.4M
American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation 2204-TNCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001070NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR001070NCI NIH HHS R01 CA213149NIH HHS R01 CA213149
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to assess surgical margins of canine soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and determine the influence of observer specialty and training. STUDY

designBlinded clinical prospective study. ANIMALS: Twenty-five dogs undergoing surgical excision of STS.

methodsIn vivo and ex vivo surgical margins were imaged with OCT after tumor resection. Representative images and videos were used to generate a training presentation and data sets. These were completed by 16 observers of four specialties (surgery, radiology, pathology, and OCT researchers). Images and videos from data sets were classified as cancerous or noncancerous.

resultsThe overall sensitivity and specificity were 88.2% and 92.8%, respectively, for in vivo tissues and 82.5% and 93.3%, respectively, for ex vivo specimens. The overall accurate classification for all specimens was 91.4% in vivo and 89.5% ex vivo. There was no difference in accuracy of interpretation of OCT imaging by observers of different specialties or experience levels.

conclusionUse of OCT to accurately assess surgical margins after STS excision was associated with a high sensitivity and specificity among various specialties. Personnel of all specialties and experience levels could effectively be trained to interpret OCT imaging. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Optical coherence tomography can be used by personnel of different specialty experience levels and from various specialties to accurately identify canine STS in vivo and ex vivo after a short training session. These encouraging results provide evidence to justify further research to assess the ability of OCT to provide real-time assessments of surgical margins and its applicability to other neoplasms.

Indexed as

Margins of ExcisionAnimalsDog DiseasesDogsFemaleMaleSarcomaSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Optical Coherence

Identifiers

PMID32916007
PMCPMC9744383
OpenAlexW3086264590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.