Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33757455›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2021

In-laboratory breast specimen radiography reduces tissue block utilization and improves turnaround time of pathologic examination.

Sri Krishna Chaitanya Arudra, Laura C Garvey, Ian S Hagemann

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Sri Krishna Chaitanya ArudraDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, 425 S. Euclid Ave., Campus Box 8118, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
Laura C GarveyDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, 425 S. Euclid Ave., Campus Box 8118, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
Ian S HagemannDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, 425 S. Euclid Ave., Campus Box 8118, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA. hagemani@wustl.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3855-9745

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study was performed to determine whether in-laboratory specimen radiography reduces turnaround time or block utilization in surgical pathology.

methodsSpecimens processed during a 48-day trial of an in-lab cabinet radiography device (Faxitron) were compared to a control group of specimens imaged in the mammography suite during a prior 1-year period, and to a second group of specimens not undergoing imaging of any type.

resultsCases imaged in the mammography suite had longer turnaround time than cases not requiring imaging (by 1.15 days for core biopsies, and 1.73 days for mastectomies; p < 0.0001). In contrast, cases imaged in-lab had turnaround time that was no longer than unimaged cases (p > 0.05 for core biopsies, lumpectomies and mastectomies). Mastectomies imaged in-lab required submission of fewer blocks than controls not undergoing any imaging (mean reduction of 10.6 blocks).

conclusionsAvailability of in-lab radiography resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in turnaround time and economically meaningful reductions in block utilization.

Indexed as

Laboratories, ClinicalBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleBreastCalcinosisFemaleFiducial MarkersHumansMammographyMastectomy, Modified RadicalMastectomy, SegmentalMastectomy, SimplePathology, SurgicalSpecimen HandlingTime FactorsTissue EmbeddingBreastDiagnostic testsFaxitronQuality improvementRadiographySurgical pathology

Identifiers

PMID33757455
PMCPMC7988919

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.