ArticleCancer innovation2025
Effectiveness of ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted excision for treating benign breast lesions.
Article in Cancer innovation, 2025. 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.
- Ductal carcinoma in situ arising within a fibroadenoma in a 21-year-old woman: A case report.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Real-time deep learning for tumor segmentation and tool tracking: development and validation of an AI navigation system in vacuum-assisted breast biopsy.World journal of surgical oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ultrasound‑guided vacuum-assisted excision (UGVAE) and breast biopsy are widely used for the diagnosis and treatment of both benign and suspicious breast lesions. In this retrospective study, we aimed to determine the safety of UGVAE for benign breast lesions and provide guidance for clinical practice. Methods: We analyzed clinical and pathological data of female patients who had undergone UGVAE between January 2015 and December 2017 at our institution. All breast lesions were categorized according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) before performing UGVAE. Results: In our study cohort, UGVAE was used to resect 10,378 breast lesions from 5789 patients, and selected clinical and histopathological data were analyzed. The most common adverse events were postoperative bleeding (0.24%) and skin hypersensitivity (0.67%). The residual lesion rate was 2.27%. Fibroadenomas accounted for most of the benign lesions (7932 of 10,193; 77.82%). Breast cancer was diagnosed in 150 lesions from 128 patients. Multivariable binary logistic regression analyses showed that older age (odds ratio [OR] = 2.034, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.668-2.480, Conclusions: UGVAE is a safe and effective means of removing benign breast lesions, causing minimal postoperative trauma and fewer complications compared with open surgery. Moreover, UGVAE had little impact on the follow-up treatment and survival of patients diagnosed with breast cancer.
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.