Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35345700›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Radio-Frequency Identifier Devices (RFIDs): Our Experience With Wireless Localisation in Non-palpable Breast Masses at a UK Tertiary Breast Imaging Unit.

Chitrangada Singh, Arne Juette

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chitrangada SinghRadiology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, GBR.
Arne JuetteRadiology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, GBR.
East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Suffolk · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this report is to evaluate the impact of the percutaneous ultrasound-guided placement of wireless radio-frequency identifier devices (RFIDs; Hologic LOCalizer, Marlborough, Massachusett) and its impact in our practice of preoperative localisation of biopsy-proven breast cancers, post-vacuum assisted biopsy-site hematoma, and lymph nodes for targeted dissection pre-operatively. A single institutional retrospective analysis of RFID usage for preoperative localisation in screening and symptomatic patients with non-palpable biopsy-proven breast carcinoma was reviewed from the radiology information system at our tertiary breast imaging unit. Its impact on the radiological and surgical team practice was reviewed, including the number of appointments, the interval between scheduling image-guided localisation and intraoperative localisation, procedure failure, average deployment, and surgical time. Feedback from surgeons and pathologists practice was also taken into consideration. Fifty-nine RFID clips were placed for wireless localisation of breast cancers, lymph nodes, and post-vacuum-assisted biopsy hematoma over nine months. Seventy-three per cent (73%; n=43/59) of RFID devices were placed in biopsy-proven carcinomas under direct ultrasound guidance. The learning curve was small, as the delivery system was similar to the commonly used localisation clips. The pilot process involved RFID with radioisotope injections for the breast mass for the initial 28% (n=12 /43) cases, which were gradually transitioned into RFID only. Radioisotope was used for sentinel node purposes if required. For targeted node dissection, 3% (n=2/59) patients received RFID for biopsy-proven metastatic node localisation, with one of two with adjunct radioisotope injection. Post-vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) hematoma was localised in 24% (n=14/59) cases, four of which received adjunct radioisotope in the pilot phase. The average procedure time for RFID deployment was five minutes. The average time for surgery was 20 minutes. 1.6% (n=1/59) incidence of RFID slipping from the surface of the site through surgical exposure attributed to the superficial and immediate pre-operative placement of the RFID. This was salvageable with adjunct radioisotope injection within the pilot phase. There were no incidences of repeat localisation or repeat exploration surgeries. Planned pre-operative localisation with RFID allows for better planning and less pressured service delivery and a success rate of 98-99%. This ultimately avoids lost theatre time and patient demotivation. Surgeons have reported excellent intra-operative detectability in their approach. There has been no difficulty in the detection of the RFID within the surgical cavity despite hematoma. RFID localisers are expensive compared to our usual practice of radioisotope injection but this can be recuperated through uncoupled tariffs like gain in slots of one-stop clinics, flexibility for placement, and avoiding lost theatre time, as these can be placed up to 30 days before surgery.

Indexed as

breast cancer managementbreast cancer outcomesbreast cancer researchnon-palpable breast cancerpre-operative localization

Identifiers

PMID35345700
PMCPMC8939460
OpenAlexW4212902797

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.