Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35788756›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

Impact of contrast-enhanced mammography in surgical management of breast cancers for women with dense breasts: a dual-center, multi-disciplinary study in Asia.

Yonggeng Goh, Chen-Pin Chou, Ching Wan Chan, Shaik Ahmad Buhari, Mikael Hartman, Siau Wei Tang, Celene Wei Qi Ng, Premilla Pillay, Wynne Chua, Pooja Jagmohan and 8 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Contrast-enhanced mammography in high-dense breasts: a narrative review.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. State-of-the-art for contrast-enhanced mammography.The British journal of radiology · 2024
    Review
  10. 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

18 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yonggeng GohDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3149-0295
Chen-Pin ChouDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Ching Wan ChanDepartment of Breast Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Shaik Ahmad BuhariDepartment of Breast Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Mikael HartmanDepartment of Breast Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Siau Wei TangDepartment of Breast Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Celene Wei Qi NgDepartment of Breast Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Premilla PillayDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Wynne ChuaDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Pooja JagmohanDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Eide SterlingDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Ying Mei WongDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Loon Ying TanDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Han Yang OngDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Huay-Ben PanDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Herng-Sheng LeeDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Bao-Hui HungDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Swee Tian QuekDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore, 119074, Singapore. swee_tian_quek@nuhs.edu.sg.
National University Hospital · SGKaohsiung Veterans General Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the impact of pre-operative contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) in breast cancer patients with dense breasts.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of 232 histologically proven breast cancers in 200 women (mean age: 53.4 years ± 10.2) who underwent pre-surgical CEM imaging across two Asian institutions (Singapore and Taiwan). Majority (95.5%) of patients had dense breast tissue (BI-RADS category C or D). Surgical decision was recorded in a simulated blinded multi-disciplinary team setting on two separate scenarios: (i) pre-CEM setting with standard imaging, and clinical and histopathological results; and (ii) post-CEM setting with new imaging and corresponding histological findings from CEM. Alterations in surgical plan (if any) because of CEM imaging were recorded. Predictors CEM of patients who benefitted from surgical plan alterations were evaluated using logistic regression.

resultsCEM resulted in altered surgical plans in 36 (18%) of 200 patients in this study. CEM discovered clinically significant larger tumor size or extent in 24 (12%) patients and additional tumors in 12 (6%) patients. CEM also detected additional benign/false-positive lesions in 13 (6.5%) of the 200 patients. Significant predictors of patients who benefitted from surgical alterations found on multivariate analysis were pre-CEM surgical decision for upfront breast conservation (OR, 7.7; 95% CI, 1.9-32.1; p = 0.005), architectural distortion on mammograms (OR, 7.6; 95% CI, 1.3-42.9; p = .022), and tumor size of ≥ 1.5 cm (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.0-2.2; p = .034).

conclusionCEM is an effective imaging technique for pre-surgical planning for Asian breast cancer patients with dense breasts. KEY POINTS: • CEM significantly altered surgical plans in 18% (nearly 1 in 5) of this Asian study cohort with dense breasts. • Significant patient and imaging predictors for surgical plan alteration include (i) patients considered for upfront breast-conserving surgery; (ii) architectural distortion lesions; and (iii) tumor size of ≥ 1.5 cm. • Additional false-positive/benign lesions detected through CEM were uncommon, affecting only 6.5% of the study cohort.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMammographyBreastBreast DensityFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityBreast densityBreast neoplasmsClinical decision-makingContrast mediaMammography

Identifiers

PMID35788756
PMCPMC9705461
OpenAlexW4283809743

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.