ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
Contrast-enhanced mammography-guided biopsy and localization: initial outcome and a single institution's experience.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has emerged as a highly sensitive modality for detecting breast lesions, particularly those occult on conventional imaging. Although CEM-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) has been established as a feasible technique, there are no prior reports about the use of CEM-guided core needle biopsy (CNB) or wire localization (WL). This study, therefore, aimed to describe our center's initial outcome of CEM-guided CNB and WL for breast enhancing lesions. Methods: This retrospective study included 35 lesions of 35 patients who underwent CEM-guided CNB and WL between December 2023 and March 2025 at a single institution. Patient and lesion characteristics, procedural features, and pathology data were recorded. Results: The 35 women were aged 28-67 years (mean 48.7 years). The success rate of CEM-guided procedure was 100.0%, and complications occurred in 2 cases (5.7%, 2/35) with minor hematomas. The mean size of lesions was 2.1±1.9 cm, with 17 (48.6%) enhancing lesions as masses and the remaining 18 (51.4%) lesions as non-mass enhancement (NME). All procedures were performed using a vertical approach. Of the 35 CEM-enhancing lesions, 24 lesions underwent CEM-guided CNB and 11 lesions underwent CEM-guided WL. For CEM-guided CNB, the mean procedure time was 14.2±3.4 min. The mean average glandular dose (AGD) for a single acquisition was 2.2±0.2 mGy and the mean AGD was 9.3±2.6 mGy per procedure. For CEM-guided WL, the mean procedure time was 12.4±2.8 min. The mean AGD for a single acquisition was 2.1±0.4 mGy and the mean AGD per procedure was 15.6±3.2 mGy. Conclusions: CEM-guided procedure demonstrates promising potential for enhancing lesions, with high rates of success, short operation time, and fewer complications in this preliminary study; however, these findings require further validation in larger sample sizes.
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.