ArticleScientific reports2020
Accuracy of gross intraoperative margin assessment for breast cancer: experience since the SSO-ASTRO margin consensus guidelines.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of frozen section in intraoperative margin assessment for breast-conserving surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- 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
- Robot-assisted biopsy sampling for online Raman spectroscopy cancer confirmation in the operating room.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- A color-based tumor segmentation method for clinical ex vivo breast tissue assessment utilizing a multi-contrast brightfield imaging strategy.Journal of biophotonics · 2024Article
- SENOSI Confocal Microscopy: A New and Innovating Way to Detect Positive Margins in Non-Palpable Breast Cancer?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Reply to Comment on "Recommendations for an Effective and Safe Extreme Oncoplastic Breast Surgery Combining Multiple Techniques".Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Multivariate analysis of breast tissue using optical parameters extracted from a combined time-resolved fluorescence and diffuse reflectance system for tumor margin detection.Journal of biomedical optics · 2023Article
- The underused potential of breast conserving therapy after neoadjuvant system treatment - Causes and solutions.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2023Review
- Application of tangent-arc technology for deep inspiration breath-hold radiotherapy in left-sided breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Automated assessment of breast margins in deep ultraviolet fluorescence images using texture analysis.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
- Multi-class classification of breast tissue using optical coherence tomography and attenuation imaging combined via deep learning.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
- RapidET: a MEMS-based platform for label-free and rapid demarcation of tumors from normal breast biopsy tissues.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2022Article
- Development of intraoperative assessment of margins in breast conserving surgery: a narrative review.Gland surgery · 2022Review
- Developing diagnostic assessment of breast lumpectomy tissues using radiomic and optical signatures.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Introducing Fluorescence-Guided Surgery for Pediatric Ewing, Osteo-, and Rhabdomyosarcomas: A Literature Review.Biomedicines · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Gross intraoperative assessment can be used to ensure negative margins at the time of surgery. Previous studies of this technique were conducted before the introduction of consensus guidelines defining a "positive" margin. We performed a retrospective study examining the accuracy of this technique since these guidelines were published. We identified all specimens that were grossly examined at the time of breast conserving surgery from January 2014 to July 2020. Gross and final microscopic diagnoses were compared and the performance of intraoperative examination was assessed in terms of false positive and false negative rates. Logistic regression models were used to examine the effect of clinicopathologic covariates on discordance. 327 cases were reviewed. Gross exam prompted re-excision in 166 cases (61%). The rate of false negative discordance was 8.6%. In multivariate analysis, multifocality on final pathology was associated with discordance. We consider the false negative rate acceptable for routine clinical use; however, there is an ongoing need for more accurate methods for the intraoperative assessment of margins.
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.