ReviewRadiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc2026
Selection of Breast Biopsy Markers: Effect on Breast Imaging Procedures, Follow-up, and Costs.
Review in Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast biopsy markers have evolved from simple metallic markers to sophisticated multimaterial devices that serve critical purposes throughout the breast cancer care continuum. This evolution began at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in the 1960s for gynecologic and head and neck tumors. After the MicroMark (Biopsys) clip was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1995, markers were subsequently adapted for patients with breast cancer in 1999. By 2003, markers had become the standard of care. Modern markers serve multiple clinical functions: marking biopsy sites, facilitating cross-modality imaging correlation, guiding surgical planning and radiation therapy targeting, and ensuring continuity of care across health care facilities. Long-term studies demonstrate excellent safety profiles with minimal adverse events and significant cost-effectiveness through improved surgical precision and reduced re-excision rates. Despite the widespread adoption of these markers, contemporary challenges persist, including marker migration, allergic reactions to metallic components or embedding materials, and visibility limitations on US images. However, recent technological advances address these concerns through improved marker designs, nonmetallic alternatives, and innovative detection methods. Current best practices emphasize optimal placement timing, appropriate marker selection based on patient-specific factors, migration prevention techniques, and use of Doppler US "twinkling" artifacts for enhanced US visualization.
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.