| Title |
MarginProbe© reduces the rate of re-excision following breast conserving surgery for breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00404-016-4011-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jens-Uwe Blohmer, Julia Tanko, Janina Kueper, Jessica Groß, Ragna Völker, Anna Machleidt |
| Abstract |
A positive margin status after breast conserving surgery (BCS) is one of the strongest predictors for local recurrence of intraductal (DCIS) and invasive carcinoma. As much as 20-50 % of patients with BCS need to undergo a second operation to receive free margins. In this study we tested the clinical performance of MarginProbe© (Dune Medical Devices, Paoli, PA, USA), a device for the intraoperative evaluation of surgical margins. A prospective clinical study was performed: The device was utilized in BCS of 150 patients treated at a single facility from November 2012 to June 2013. The re-excision rate was compared to the re-excision rate of a historical group of 172 patients treated with BCS at the same hospital without the application of the device. We analyzed whether the results of MarginProbe© are affected by the morphology, grading, size of the tumor, breast density, age, BMI or the use of marker-wires. The application of MarginProbe© resulted in an overall decreased re-excision rate of 14.6 %. In the subgroup of DCIS the re-excision rate was reduced from 61.7 to 23.1 %. In the subgroup of invasive lobular carcinomas the re-excision rate decreased from 37.0 to 19.0 %. MarginProbe© results were not affected by grading, tumor size, breast density, age, BMI or marker-wire application. MarginProbe© detects positive margins in invasive carcinoma, DCIS as well as in invasive lobular carcinoma. The device decreases the re-excision rate after BCS significantly. It does not interfere with any of the factors we examined. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 35% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 153. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 March 2016.
All research outputs
#240,964
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#10
of 2,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,581
of 398,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#2
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 398,869 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.