Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35711894›Full record

ArticleThe breast journal2022

Minimally Invasive Excision of Breast Masses under Ultrasound Guidance: A Single Center's Five-Year Experience on the Breast Lesion Excision System.

Hakki Muammer Karakas, Gulsah Yildirim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The breast journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Hakki Muammer KarakasUniversity of Health Sciences, Istanbul Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiology, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-1328-8520
Gulsah YildirimUniversity of Health Sciences, Istanbul Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiology, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-5971-7079

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of the percutaneous radiofrequency (RF) excision system (BLES) as a primary method of diagnosis and removal of small breast masses. Methods: Ninety-six lesions in 95 patients with 50.5 ± 8.4 years of age were treated in a five-year period by a single operator. Inclusion criteria were as follows: size (<20 mm), depth (>10 mm), and indeterminate or suspicious radiological features (74 BI-RADS 3 and 22 BI-RADS 4). The procedure was performed under ultrasound (US) guidance using 6 G retriever probes with 12-, 15-, and 20-mm baskets. Results: Lesions were between 5 and 20 (12.3 ± 3.8) mm in length. They were removed at the first attempt in all but one case. The technical success rate was 98.95%, and the diagnostic success rate was 100%. Ninety-one lesions were histologically benign and five were neoplastic. Two lesions that were previously classified as BI-RADS 3 were diagnosed as neoplasia (atypical lobular hyperplasia), and nineteen lesions that were previously classified as BI-RADS 4a were diagnosed as benign. The complete excision rate (presence of tumor-free negative surgical margin) was 40% in neoplastic lesions. There were no major complications. The minor complication rate was 1.58%. No recurrence was observed during 18 months of follow-up. Conclusion: BLES delivers surgical quality specimens for confident histopathological examination and is a safe alternative to surgical resection in lesions with suitable size.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsBreastFemaleHumansHyperplasiaMargins of ExcisionRetrospective StudiesStereotaxic TechniquesUltrasonography, Mammary

Identifiers

PMID35711894
PMCPMC9187288

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.