ArticleGland surgery2020
Mammary hamartoma: is ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy sufficient for its treatment?
Article in Gland surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ability of MRI Breast to Predict Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in Patients with Breast Cancer.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2026Review
- Breast hamartomas associated with epithelial atypia and malignancy: are there specific clinical, radiological or pathological features that identify at risk patients?Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of percutaneous ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted excision for the treatment of clinical benign breast lesions larger than 3 cm: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Breast Hamartoma: Clinical, Radiological, and Histopathological Evaluation.European journal of breast health · 2021Article
- Article
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
backgroundMammary hamartomas were mostly benign tumors with rare rate of recurrence and malignant transformation. Ultrasound (US)-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) has been reported sufficiently safe in treating many breast benign tumors but remained undefined in mammary hamartoma for its usual underdiagnosis in US. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the efficiency of US-guided VABB in treating mammary hamartomas.
methodsFrom May 2015 to March 2019, 3,388 lesions of 2,534 patients underwent percutaneous US-guided VABB, among which 31 mammary hamartomas proved by pathology were included in this study. Patients were followed up by US three, six and twelve months later, then at 1-year intervals. Lesions were classified to analyze the possible factors associated with excision rate, bleeding volume and complications.
resultsOf the 31 patients, recurrence was seen in 1 case in 1 year after the procedure and complete excision rate was 96.8% (30/31). The bleeding volume ranged from 1 to 15 mL (mean number ± standard deviation, 6.5±3.4 mL) and significant statistical differences were detected in patient age and the largest diameter of lesions. The main complications included pain (22.6%), hematomas (9.7%) and ecchymosis (3.2%).
conclusionsUS-guided VABB ensures an outstanding complete excision rate and provides an alternative solution to treat mammary hamartomas.
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.