ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2026
Comparing intraoperative ultrasound and wire-guided localisation for skin cancer metastases: impacts on patient safety, outcomes, costs, and implementation.
Article in World journal of surgical 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsLocalisation of non-palpable isolated or oligometastatic disease can be an intraoperative challenge. This quality improvement study aims to demonstrate the novel use of intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) in localising oligometastatic disease. We evaluated its clinical effectiveness in comparison with the gold-standard wire-guided localisation technique in localising oligometastatic disease.
methodsWe assembled a database of patients at a specialist tertiary referral centre in the United Kingdom who had IOUS-guided or wire-guided tumour localisation and conducted informal interviews with two Plastic Surgery Consultants, a Consultant Radiologist and a Radiographer. We retrospectively analysed the effectiveness of IOUS guidance in localising cancer metastasis, focusing on physician-reported patient safety, clinical outcomes, costs and implementation and compared this to the wire-guided technique.
resultsOver the last 8 years, 19 patients had IOUS-guided tumour localisation, and 8 patients had wire-guided localisation since its on-site implementation 3 years ago. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed comparing 8 patients who underwent wire-guided tumour localisation between 2022 and 2024 with 8 patients who received IOUS-guided tumour localisation over the same period. Although IOUS extended the duration of surgery, it was less invasive, associated with lower complication rates (12.5% vs. 25.0%) and offered real-time reassurance. IOUS use was £12.65 (18%) cheaper and easier to implement compared with wire-guided localisation. Since 2017, IOUS-guided localisation has been associated with a low positive margin rate of 5.26% and a re-excision rate of 11.1%.
conclusionThe advantages of using IOUS for patient safety, cost-effectiveness and overall outcomes highlight its role in clinical practice and the need for a standardised protocol for its implementation. Conducting a large-scale multi-centre study is necessary to improve the generalisability of findings.
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.