SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024
Vacuum-assisted excision: a safe minimally invasive option for benign phyllodes tumor diagnosis and treatment-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Budget Impact Analysis of Vacuum-Assisted Excision Versus Surgical Excision for the Assessment of Breast Lesions of Uncertain Malignant Potential in Italy.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Management of high-risk (B3) breast lesions in symptomatic practice: evidence review and practical recommendations for multidisciplinary care.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Image-guided biopsy of breast lesions-when to use what biopsy technique.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Vacuum-assisted excision: one-step approach to the diagnosis and percutaneous treatment of small early breast cancer (the VAE-BREAST 01 study protocol).Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical study of vacuum-assisted excision of deep breast nodules via the retromammary space.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Synopsis: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing surgical excision with percutaneous ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted excision (US-VAE) for the treatment of benign phyllodes tumor (PT) using local recurrence (LR) as the endpoint. Objective: To determine the frequency of local recurrence (LR) of benign phyllodes tumor (PT) after ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted excision (US-VAE) compared to the frequency of LR after surgical excision. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis [following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard] was conducted by comparing LR in women older than 18 years treated for benign PT by US-VAE compared with local surgical excision with at least 12 months of follow-up. Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. The pooled effect measure used was the odds ratio (OR) of recurrence. Results: Five comparative prospective or retrospective observational studies published between January 1, 1992, and January 10, 2022, comparing surgical excision with percutaneous US-VAE for LR of benign PT met the selection criteria. Four were retrospective observational cohorts, and one was a prospective observational cohort. A total of 778 women were followed up. Of them, 439 (56.4%) underwent local surgical excision, and 339 (43.6%) patients had US-VAE. The median age of patients in the five studies ranged from 33.7 to 39 years; the median size ranged from 1.5 cm to 3.0 cm, and the median follow-up ranged from 12 months to 46.6 months. The needle gauge ranged from 7G to 11G. LR rates were not statically significant between US-VAE and surgical excision (41 of 339 Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that using US-VAE for the removal of benign PT does not increase local regional recurrence and is a safe minimally invasive therapeutic option. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022309782.
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.