ArticleInsights into imaging2026
Clinical observation of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for 1717 benign breast lesions: a multicenter study.
Article in Insights into imaging, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation (MWA) for benign breast lesions (BBLs). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective multicenter study (January 2020 to July 2023) included 1043 patients from seven centers with 1717 biopsy-proven benign breast lesions. The study analyzed contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)-confirmed ablation outcomes, complications, volume reduction ratio (VRR), cosmetic satisfaction, and time of complete absorption (TCA).
resultsOn postoperative day 1, CEUS demonstrated complete non-enhancement in 1713/1717 lesions (99.77%) after the initial ablation; four lesions with residual enhancement underwent immediate supplementary ablation with subsequent CEUS-confirmed non-enhancement. The mean maximum lesion diameter was 1.38 ± 0.25 cm. After a median follow-up of 38.7 months, 1643 out of 1717 lesions (95.69%) were not palpable. The 12-month VRR was 99.98% for lesions ≤ 1.0 cm, 98.20% for lesions 1.0 to 2.0 cm, and 85.43% for lesions ≥ 2.0 cm. VRR was significantly associated with lesion size and procedural parameters, including ablation power and the number of antenna insertions (all p < 0.001). Postoperative pain was mild (VAS 0.52 ± 0.43), and no patients discontinued treatment due to pain. Minor complications included fat liquefaction in 3 of 1717 lesions (0.17%) and self-limiting nodularity or fibrosis in 106 lesions (6.2%). No major complications, such as burns, infection, or bleeding, occurred. Cosmetic satisfaction was rated as excellent in 92.4% of patients and good in 7.6%.
conclusionPercutaneous MWA is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive treatment for BBLs, providing durable lesion regression and excellent cosmetic outcomes with minimal self-limiting complications. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This multicenter study supports ultrasound-guided microwave ablation as a feasible minimally invasive treatment for benign breast lesions, providing durable long-term regression and favorable cosmetic outcomes while helping reduce procedure-related tissue trauma associated with surgery. KEY POINTS: Long-term multicenter evidence for ultrasound-guided microwave ablation of benign breast lesions remains limited, particularly regarding safety, lesion regression, and cosmetic outcomes. Microwave ablation achieved 99.77% day-1 contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) non-enhancement, durable lesion regression, minimal complications, and high cosmetic satisfaction during long-term follow-up.
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.