Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32933518›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2020

Breast papillary lesions diagnosed and treated using ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted excision.

Xiaohui Li, Hua Gao, Minling Xu, Yang Wu, Dezong Gao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Xiaohui LiNosocomial Infection Department, The Second Hospital, Shandong University Cheeloo College of Medicine, Jinan, 250033, China.
Hua GaoDepartment of Thoracic and General Surgery, Shandong Provincial Chest Hospital, Jinan, 250101, China.
Minling XuMaternity and Child Care Center of DeZhou, DeZhou, 253015, China.
Yang WuDepartment of Breast Surgery, The Second Hospital, Shandong University Cheeloo College of Medicine, No. 247, Beiyuandajie Street, Jinan, 250033, China.
Dezong GaoDepartment of Breast Surgery, The Second Hospital, Shandong University Cheeloo College of Medicine, No. 247, Beiyuandajie Street, Jinan, 250033, China. gaohill100@yeah.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1644-3626

Funding

Research and Development Project of Digital Diagnosis and Treatment Equipment from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China. 2018YFC0114705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe management of papillary lesions of the breast remains controversial, and thus, we assessed the value of vacuum-assisted excision (VAE)-guided ultrasound in the diagnosis and treatment of breast papillary lesions.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of 108 patients with papillary lesions diagnosed using VAE between August 2014 and January 2019. Cases without postoperative breast imaging in the follow-up were excluded, and 85 cases were eligible for the study. The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 53 months, with 38 months on average. All the papillary lesions were located away from the skin or nipple with a size less than or equal to 30 mm, and the lesions categorized as C2-4b were completely excised using VAE. All VAEs were performed using an 8-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy needle under the guidance of ultrasound using a 10 MHz linear probe.

resultsMost patients with breast papillary lesions were asymptomatic (56.5%), and when the size of the breast papillary lesion was more than 20 mm on ultrasound imaging, atypical hyperplasia may have been concomitant. Breast lesions might have been pathologically diagnosed as papilloma after biopsy when they were categorized as BI-RADS 4a on ultrasound images. The rate of underestimation was 7.7% in papillary lesions diagnosed with VAE, and the recurrence rate of papilloma after VAE was low.

conclusionsBreast papilloma was a common lesion on ultrasonographic screening, and VAE was applicable for completely excising small papillomas, even papillomas with atypical hyperplasia, to obtain an accurate diagnosis with a low rate of underestimation and recurrence. We believe that papilloma diagnosed by VAE might not require immediate excision, and imaging follow-up may be safe for at least 3 years.

Indexed as

BreastBreast NeoplasmsHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographyUltrasonography, InterventionalBreastPapillary lesionsTreatmentVAE

Identifiers

PMID32933518
PMCPMC7493139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.