ArticleTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer2025
Underlying factors that affect ultrasound conspicuity of breast biopsy markers: an exploratory study.
Article in Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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 · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: During management of node-positive breast cancer, neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) is often used to de-escalate surgical intervention. To identify pathology-proven positive nodes regardless of visual changes after NST, breast biopsy clips or markers are inserted under ultrasound guidance as part of standard care, though most markers are used off-label in the axilla. However, clipped nodes may be difficult to visually confirm with ultrasound after a pathological complete response. This can affect the ease of executing subsequent procedures, such as surgical resection, because identifying the marked or clipped nodes in these cases is problematic. The mechanisms that affect these changes in clip conspicuity are poorly understood, making it challenging to improve ultrasound conspicuity of clips in the clinical setting. The aim of this study is to determine which of these mechanisms are inherent to ultrasound as an imaging modality and if they can be accounted for by adjustments to ultrasound scanner settings. Methods: The effect of viewing angle on brightness is assessed in multiple imaging targets, including five commercially-available clips, suspended in gelatin phantoms. Off-gassing from insertion of a dry clip into tissue is assessed as another possible explanation for the observed changes in conspicuity. Results: Brightness was found to vary significantly with viewing angle for some clips. An Conclusions: Viewing angle is not affected by any other settings on an ultrasound system besides probe position, suggesting that conspicuity may not be recoverable if repositioning cannot clarify clip location. Even when viewing angle is not a concern in tissue, the presence of other bright scatterers in the field of view can obscure the location of the clip.
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.