Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36457991›Full record

ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2022

Comparison of two minimally invasive biopsy techniques - Breast Lesion Excision System and vacuum-assisted biopsy - for diagnosing and treating breast lesions.

Karolina Brzuszkiewicz, Diana Hodorowicz-Zaniewska, Jan Miękisz, Andrzej Matyja

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 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, top 90% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karolina BrzuszkiewiczFirst Chair of General Surgery, Department of General, Oncological and Gastroenterological Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Diana Hodorowicz-ZaniewskaFirst Chair of General Surgery, Department of General, Oncological and Gastroenterological Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Jan MiękiszHealth Center, Tuchow, Poland.
Andrzej MatyjaSecond Chair of Endoscopic, Metabolic and Soft Tissue Cancer Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Jagiellonian University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) and the Breast Lesion Excision System (BLES) are minimally invasive biopsy techniques, both used as diagnostic and therapeutic tools. The aim of the study is to compare these two methods and assess them in the context of discomfort, early and late complications and their diagnostic and therapeutic potential. Material and methods: The study involved 173 patients who underwent a VAB or a BLES breast biopsy in the period between 2009 and 2016. Approximately 3 months after the biopsy, the patients completed a questionnaire in which they assessed the procedure for discomfort associated with the procedure and the final cosmetic outcome. The cosmetic effect of the biopsy was also assessed by a surgeon. Results: The BLES and the VAB breast biopsies did not differ in terms of pain, duration, and discomfort of the procedure, breast bruising, breast tenderness about 24 h after the procedure or pain lasting over 3 months after the biopsy. Subsequently, the biopsies were evaluated in terms of the cosmetic effect assessed by the patient and by a surgeon and no differences were observed. There were no significant differences between the VAB and the BLES breast biopsies in the course of the procedure, early and late complications and cosmetic effect. Conclusions: Since the BLES breast biopsy makes it possible to evaluate the margins, it is a good alternative to the open breast biopsy.

Indexed as

breast lesion excision systemhigh-risk breast lesionsvacuum-assisted biopsy

Identifiers

PMID36457991
PMCPMC9710256
OpenAlexW2953781290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.