SynthesisScientific reports2022
Specimen mammography for intraoperative margin assessment in breast conserving surgery: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 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.
- Specimen PET-CT Imaging for Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: The BrIMA Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.JAMA surgery · 2026Article
- Investigation of feasibility and diagnostic capability of ultrasound-guided photoacoustic tomography for breast surgical margins.Npj imaging · 2026Article
- Redefining Margin Assessment in Breast Conservation Surgery: Surgeon-Performed Intraoperative Ultrasound as a Reliable Alternative to Radiologic and Mammographic Assessment.European journal of breast health · 2026Article
- Locoregional control of downstaged breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A propensity-matched study in Chinese patients.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Article
- The impact of unplanned reoperation on clinical and economic outcomes among hospitalized surgical patients: a DRG-adjusted real-world retrospective cohort study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Photoacoustic imaging: An emerging tool for intraoperative margin assessment in breast-conserving surgery.Photoacoustics · 2026Review
- Automated Tumor Segmentation in Breast-Conserving Surgery Using Deep Learning on Breast Tomosynthesis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Margin assessment during breast conserving surgery using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Evolution of localization methods for non-palpable breast lesions: a literature review from a translational medicine perspective.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024Review
- Adherence to Quality Indicators for Breast Cancer Management in a Multidisciplinary Training Program.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- [GMIA-Breast Oncoplastic and Reconstruction Society consensus on operative standards of breast cancer surgery].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In breast conserving surgery (BCS), specimen mammography is one of the most widely used intraoperative methods of assessing margin status. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of specimen mammography. Literature databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched prior to Jun 2022. A total of 1967 patients were included from 20 studies. A pooled analysis, heterogeneity testing, threshold effect testing, publication bias analysis, and subgroup analyses were performed from extracted data. The pooled weighted values were a sensitivity of 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47-0.63), a specificity of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.90), a diagnostic odds ratio of 7 (95% CI, 4-12), and a pooled positive likelihood ratio of 3.7 (95% CI 2.6-5.5). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.75 (95% CI 0.71-0.78). In the subgroup analysis, the pooled specificity in the positive margin defined as tumor at margin subgroup was lower than the other positive margin definition subgroup (0.82 [95% CI: 0.71, 0.92] vs. 0.87 [95% CI: 0.80, 0.94], p = 0.01). Our findings indicated that specimen mammography was an accurate intraoperative imaging technique for margin assessment in BCS.
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.