ReviewBiomedicines2025
Histopathological Analysis of Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy in Relation to Microcalcification Findings on Mammography: A Pictorial Review.
Review in Biomedicines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mammography is an essential tool in breast screening, often revealing lesions that appear as microcalcifications with or without an associated mass. Decisions about biopsy requirements are guided by the BI-RADS system, aiming to confirm the histopathology of suspicious lesions while avoiding unnecessary procedures. A vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) is a minimally invasive procedure for diagnosing breast abnormalities. Precise lesion targeting is ensured under stereotactic guidance, reducing the need for repeated procedures. Compared to traditional core needle biopsy (CNB) and fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), it differs in using vacuum assistance to gather more tissue volume, increasing diagnostic accuracy and reducing the likelihood of histological underestimation. This is particularly crucial in cases where microcalcifications are the primary finding, as they are often the earliest signs of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Managing such findings requires precise diagnostic tools to differentiate benign from malignant lesions without subjecting patients to unnecessary surgical interventions. Building on several years of experience in our department, we have assembled a selection of ten interesting cases encountered in our clinical practice. Each case is documented with paired mammographic images and their corresponding image of histopathological findings, offering a comprehensive view of the diagnostic journey. These cases were selected for their educational value, highlighting the integration of imaging modalities, histopathological evaluation, and clinical decision-making. All cases underwent an extensive diagnostic workup at our facility. This compilation aims to provide valuable insights for both clinicians and researchers, offering a deeper understanding of advanced diagnostic techniques and their role in improving patient outcomes.
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.