ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2023
Contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy: technique and initial outcomes.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical Guide to Percutaneous Biopsy with Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: From Planning to Post-Procedural Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy and localization: initial outcome and a single institution's experience.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy: principles, challenges, and opportunities.Insights into imaging · 2025Review
- Breast radiation dose with contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy: a retrospective comparison with stereotactic and tomosynthesis guidance.European radiology · 2025Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Literature Review of Clinical Uses for Cancer Diagnosis and Surgical Oncology.Cancers · 2024Review
- Comparing core needle biopsy and surgical excision in breast cancer diagnosis: implications for clinical practice from a retrospective cohort study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- The value of contrast-enhanced energy-spectrum mammography combined with clinical indicators in detecting breast cancer in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 lesions.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- The verification of the utility of a commercially available phantom combination for quality control in contrast-enhanced mammography.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography-Guided Biopsy: Preliminary Results of a Single-Center Retrospective Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy (CEM-Bx), a novel technique for diagnosing suspicious enhanced lesions, was commercialized for clinical application in 2021; however, there are only a few publications documenting this technique in the existing literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the procedural performance and preliminary outcomes of CEM-Bx performed in our hospital between from September 2021 to June 2022. We reviewed data of 12 women who underwent CEM-Bx during the study period, including their demographic and procedural characteristics, biopsy success rate, histopathological diagnosis, and average glandular dose (AGD). All women (mean age ± standard deviation: 54±6 years) showed enhanced breast lesions on CEM and underwent CEM-Bx within one week. The success rate of CEM-Bx was 100%. The vertical needle approach was used in a decubitus position (N=7, 58%), while the horizontal needle approach was used in an upright sitting position (N=5, 42%). The mean procedure time for the CEM-Bx was 17±6.3 min. The mean AGD was 14.3±12.3 mGy. Histopathologic examination revealed a malignancy rate of 66.7%. In summary, CEM-Bx is a feasible technique, with a high success rate of diagnosing contract-enhanced lesions.
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.