ArticleJournal of medical imaging and radiation oncology2026
Preoperative Radar Localisation of Impalpable Breast and Axillary Lesions: Initial Experience in an Australian Tertiary Centre.
Article in Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionImage-guided radar localisation (RL) is a wire-free alternative to hookwire localisation (HWL) for preoperative localisation of impalpable breast and axillary lesions, with potential logistical and technical advantages. This study assesses clinical utility, accuracy of placement and surgical oncologic outcome metrics for RL using the SCOUT reflector compared to HWL after introduction in a tertiary Australian breast service.
methodsRetrospective comparative cohort analysis of consecutive RL with a contemporaneous historical HWL cohort of similar size (between January 2022 and March 2025) was performed. Key outcome markers included device migration, localisation procedure duration, retrieval issues, surgical margin status and breast malignancy re-excision rates.
results287 patients were included (RL n = 144; HWL n = 143). No significant device migration was seen with RL compared to HWL (0.0% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.04) and retrieval issues were less common (4.2% vs. 9.8%; p = 0.10). Excluding MRI placement, procedure duration was shorter with RL (23 min vs. 28 min; p < 0.01). Negative, close, and positive margins were similar and re-excision rates for breast malignancy comparable (12.5% RL vs 16.8% HWL, p = 0.42).
conclusionRL is a safe, accurate localisation technique, demonstrating significantly fewer migration issues and fewer retrieval issues than HWL, while maintaining equivalent surgical oncologic outcomes. It offers logistical benefits of placement at any time prior to surgery (including time-of-biopsy placement), optimisation of radiology and surgical workflows, and versatility of axillary node and MRI-guided placement and compatibility.
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.