ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2026
Surgeon seniority and performance in breast-conserving surgery for non-palpable lesions: evidence from a multicenter study.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05942105 (A Retrospective Multicentric Clinical Study Comparing Different Techniques for Intraoperative Localization of Non-palpable Breast Lesions During Breast Conservative Surgery), which is not on this 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.
A Retrospective Multicentric Clinical Study Comparing Different Techniques for Intraoperative Localization of Non-palpable Breast Lesions During Breast Conservative Surgery
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Breast RT microcalcifications: a stress test for trainee-led magnetic-seed lumpectomy.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for non-palpable lesions is technically demanding, often performed by surgical trainees under supervision. Despite extensive literature evaluating localization techniques, only few studies have directly examined the role of surgeon seniority in determining surgical performance in this specific setting. We conducted a retrospective multicenter analysis (LOCALIZATION01 study, NCT05942105) including 3,195 patients who underwent BCS for non-palpable breast lesions between 2016 and 2024 across 12 Breast Units. Four localization techniques were used: wire-guided (WGL), radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL), magnetic seed localization (MSL), carbon localization (CL). Outcomes included margin status, calculated resection ratio (CRR), operative time, and complications, stratified by surgeon seniority (attending vs resident). Most procedures were performed by attending surgeons (89.3%, n = 2,855) compared to residents (10.7%, n = 340). Margin positivity rates didn't differ significantly across localization techniques (e.g., ROLL 3.7% vs 2.3%, p = 0.30; MSL 9.4% vs 4.4%, p = 0.11, WGL 2.7% vs 5.9 p = 0.16, CL 0% vs 9.6% p = 0.10). Residents achieved better CRR in ROLL procedures (2.0, IQR 3, [1-47] vs 2.8, IQR 5, [1-78], p = 0.006), but had longer operative times, particularly with SLNB (e.g., MSL 60 min, IQR 31, [37-98] vs 55 min, IQR 20, [18-180], p = 0.02). Complication rates were low and comparable between groups. In a supervised setting, surgeon seniority doesn't significantly impact margin status, complication rates, or overall oncologic safety in BCS for non-palpable breast lesions. Localization methods with high reproducibility, such as ROLL and MSL, may mitigate the influence of surgical inexperience. These findings support the safe involvement of trainees in BCS under adequate supervision.
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.