Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39236047›Full record

Trial reportJournal of breast imaging2024

The Role of Predeployment Retraction in Biopsy Marker Migration During Stereotactic Breast Biopsies: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Noon Eltoum, Kathryn Zamora, Adrian Murray, John West, Joseph Willis, Angela Chieh, Yufeng Li, Mei Li, Jeong Mi Park, Stefanie Woodard

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of breast imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04398537 (The Role of Pre-deployment Retraction in Decreasing Biopsy Clip Migration During Stereotactic Breast Biopsies), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04398537 nacompletednot on this map

The Role of Pre-deployment Retraction in Decreasing Biopsy Clip Migration During Stereotactic Breast Biopsies

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamRan2020 to 2023Enrolled245ConditionsBreast BiopsyArms5mm retraction of clip deployment apparatus., No retraction of clip deployment apparatus.
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Selection of Breast Biopsy Markers: Effect on Breast Imaging Procedures, Follow-up, and Costs.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2026
    Review
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

10 authors.

Noon EltoumDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4210-8012
Kathryn ZamoraDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4606-706X
Adrian MurrayDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
John WestDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Joseph WillisDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Angela ChiehDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Yufeng LiDivision of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Mei LiDivision of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Jeong Mi ParkDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Stefanie WoodardDepartment of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2496-6964

Funding

XRAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA013148 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Robert S Welner · 1985 to 2026
$165.9M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS013852NCI NIH HHS P30 CA013148
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveInaccurate breast biopsy marker placement and marker migration during stereotactic biopsy procedures compromise their reliability for lesion localization and precise surgical excision. This trial evaluated the impact of 5-mm predeployment retraction of the marker introducer on marker migration, investigating other potential factors that influence the outcome.

methodsThis parallel, randomized controlled trial enrolled women aged ≥18 years undergoing stereotactic breast biopsy at a single institution from May 2020 through August 2022. The study was approved by the institutional review board at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB). Patients were randomized to intervention (5-mm introducer retraction before marker deployment) or control (standard marker placement) by drawing a labeled paper. The primary outcome was the distance of marker migration on immediate postprocedure mammogram.

resultsOf 251 patients enrolled, 223 were analyzed; 104 received the intervention, and 119 received control. Mean (SD) marker migration was 12.1 (14.9) mm in the intervention group vs 9.8 (14.9) mm, with differences between groups estimated at 2.3 mm (SE = 1.9, P = .2312) (d = 0.16; 95% CI, 1.5-6.0). Effects of age, breast density, thickness, and biopsy approach showed no statistical significance. In exploratory models, central lesions exhibited 5.7 mm less migration than proximal lesions (95% CI, 0.7-10.6; P = .025), and each body mass index (BMI) unit increase was associated with 0.3 mm greater migration (95% CI, 0-0.6; P = .044).

conclusionRetracting the marker introducer 5 mm before deployment did not reduce migration. Higher BMI and certain lesion locations were all associated with marker migration, highlighting the need to investigate biomechanical factors and techniques to optimize breast marker placement.Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04398537.

Indexed as

BreastBreast NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleFiducial MarkersForeign-Body MigrationHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMammographyMiddle AgedStereotaxic Techniquesbreast biopsymarker migrationstereotactic breast biopsy

Identifiers

PMID39236047
PMCPMC11841708

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.