ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Breast-conserving surgery after vacuum-assisted biopsy in patients with unexpected breast cancer: is it reliable? A 5-year follow-up study.
Article in Frontiers in 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) is commonly used for complete resection of benign tumors and diagnostic biopsy of suspected malignant tumors in China. Post-procedural hematoma formation may potentially facilitate tumor cell dissemination into surrounding tissues. When pathological analysis confirms malignancy, does subsequent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) affect long-term prognosis? This study aims to use five-year follow-up data to investigate these issues. Methods: All patients diagnosed with malignancy following VABB between January 2016 and January 2020 were included in this study. These patients were subsequently stratified into two cohorts based on their selected surgical approach (BCS vs. mastectomy). Clinical and pathological characteristics, comprehensive treatment regimens, and recurrence rates were systematically compared between the groups. Results: A cohort of 124 patients with BI-RADS category 3 or 4a lesions, diagnosed with incidental breast malignancies, was enrolled. The breast-conserving surgery (BCS) group comprised 64 patients (51.6%), of whom 6 demonstrated positive resection margins (9.4%) and 2 ultimately underwent conversion to total mastectomy. Preoperative clinical parameters showed no significant intergroup differences except for tumor location. During follow-up, 8 patients developed ipsilateral recurrence or contralateral new primaries, with 3 subsequent cancer-related deaths; however, no statistically significant differences were observed between the surgical groups. Conclusions: Hematoma and residual cavities may appear after VABB in unexpected breast cancer, potentially affecting surgical visualization and raising concerns about tumor cell extravasation. However, as long as the cavity is completely removed to ensure negative surgical margins, further BCS does not adversely affect patient prognosis.
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.