Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40860772›Full record

ArticleBreast care (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Clinicopathological Factors Affecting Positive Margins after Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Comparative Study of Low- and High-Volume Hospitals.

Seher Makineli, Sofie A M Gernaat, Milan C Richir, Wouter B Veldhuis, Liesbeth M Veenendaal, Maaike R Moman, Patrick I Ferdinandus, Menno R Vriens, Paul J van Diest, Wies Maarse and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast care (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Seher MakineliDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sofie A M GernaatDivision of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Milan C RichirDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Wouter B VeldhuisDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Liesbeth M VeenendaalDepartment of Surgery, Alexander Monro Hospital, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Maaike R MomanDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Patrick I FerdinandusDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Alexander Monro Hospital, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Menno R VriensDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Paul J van DiestDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Wies MaarseDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Arjen J WitkampDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Positive margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) are an important risk factor for local tumor recurrence and the need for re-excision in women with breast cancer. It remains unclear which factors collectively influence positive margins after BCS and whether the outcomes vary among hospitals. This study investigated the occurrence and risk factors of positive margins after BCS in women with breast cancer in two Dutch hospitals. Methods: Data were collected retrospectively from medical records of women who were diagnosed with newly invasive breast carcinoma or carcinoma in situ and underwent primary BCS between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 in two Dutch hospitals. Results: A total of 423 cases (410 patients) were included, with a median age of 58 years (interquartile range 51-66). On average, the positive margin rate after BCS was 8.0%, which was significantly higher in the low-volume hospital (14.9%) than in the high-volume hospital (5.9%). Invasive lobular carcinoma (odds ratio [OR] = 4.97, confidence interval [CI] = 1.91-12.94), postoperative tumor size (OR = 1.07, CI = 1.03-1.11), low hospital volume (OR = 3.90, CI = 1.58-9.66), and lumpectomy size (OR = 0.97, CI = 0.94-1.00) were significantly associated with positive margins after BCS. Conclusion: Positive margin rate after BCS was low, with 8.0% among all cases and varied significantly between the hospitals. Patient-, tumor-, radiological-, and surgery-related factors may contribute to these variations. An optimized collaborative multidisciplinary approach to breast cancer care, particularly between radiologists and surgeons, should be strived to achieve improved oncological outcomes in women after BCS.

Indexed as

Breast cancerBreast-conserving surgeryOncoplastic surgeryRadical resectionSurgical margin status

Identifiers

PMID40860772
PMCPMC12377799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.