ArticleLa Radiologia medica2022
Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography and tumor size assessment: a valuable tool for appropriate surgical management of breast lesions.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to optimise breast cancer staging with contrast-enhanced mammography: current evidence and clinical implications.Insights into imaging · 2026Review
- Contrast-enhanced mammography versus breast MRI: a multidimensional cost-effectiveness analysis.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Achieving single-contrast administration for enhanced chest CT and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography without compromising diagnostic quality: a comparative study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- Preliminary Evaluation of Radiomics in Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Prognostic Prediction of Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2025Article
- Morphodynamic Features of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Their Correlation with Breast Cancer Histopathology.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Contrast-enhanced mammography BI-RADS: a case-based approach to radiology reporting.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Inter-reader agreement of breast magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced mammography in breast cancer diagnosis: a multi-reader retrospective study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- History of Mammography: Analysis of Breast Imaging Diagnostic Achievements over the Last Century.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Recent Advances in Ultrasound Breast Imaging: From Industry to Clinical Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- How Radiomics Can Improve Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in the Evaluation of Breast Microcalcifications: Controversies and Diagnostic Management.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Machine Learning Approaches with Textural Features to Calculate Breast Density on Mammography.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Contextual Features and Information Bottleneck-Based Multi-Input Network for Breast Cancer Classification from Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Radiomic Features Applied to Contrast Enhancement Spectral Mammography: Possibility to Predict Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes in a Non-Invasive Manner.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography (CESM), MG, US, and breast MRI in estimating the size of breast lesions requiring surgery. The postoperative histology size of the lesion was used as the gold standard. MATERIAL AND
methodsTwo hundred thirty-three non-benign lesions in 189 patients were included in the analyses. All the selected patients underwent CESM and at least one other conventional diagnostic exam (US, MG, or MRI). Subsequently, all the patients underwent surgery preceded by cytological/histological examination. The largest diameter of the lesion at imaging was measured by a radiologist with more than 10 years' experience and then compared with the size of the lesion in the histological sample at the surgery (gold standard).
resultsAmong the 233 breast lesions, 196 were evaluated with US, 206 with MG and 160 with MRI. We found no statistically significant differences between size measurements using CESM and MRI compared with the measurements at the surgery (p value 0.63 and 0.51), whereas a significant difference was found for MG and US (p < 0.001).
conclusionCESM is a reliable method for estimating the size of breast lesions: its performance seems superior to US and MG and comparable to MRI.
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.