ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Utility of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography in the Evaluation of Bloody Nipple Discharge-A Multicenter Study in the Asian Population.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of ChatGPT-4o, Claude 3 Opus, and DeepSeek-R1 in BI-RADS Category 4 Classification and Malignancy Prediction From Mammography Reports: Retrospective Diagnostic Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- The role of AI for improved management of breast cancer: Enhanced diagnosis and health disparity mitigation.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2025Review
- An update on multimodal imaging strategies for nipple discharge: from detection to decision.Insights into imaging · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the efficacy of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in Asian patients with bloody nipple discharge (BND).
methodsThis retrospective study included 58 women with BND (mean age: 51.7 years) who underwent standardized CEM at institutions in Taiwan and Singapore. Lesion characteristics (size, enhancement, conspicuity, shape, margins) were evaluated on CEM by blinded radiologists. Non-enhanced mammography (MMG) and ultrasound (US) within a defined timeframe were compared for diagnostic accuracy. Benign or malignant status was confirmed by biopsy or 2-year imaging follow-up.
resultsMalignancy was found in 29 of 58 lesions (50.0%), with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) being the most common. CEM demonstrated a 100% negative predictive value (NPV) for non-enhancing lesions. Significant predictors of malignancy on multivariate analysis include enhancing lesions of size ≥ 1.5 cm (
conclusionsCEM effectively differentiates benign from malignant lesions in patients with BND, improving diagnostic accuracy and potentially reducing unnecessary interventions.
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.