↓ Skip to main content

Does ultrasound provide any added value in breast contouring for radiotherapy after conserving surgery for cancer?

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Does ultrasound provide any added value in breast contouring for radiotherapy after conserving surgery for cancer?
Published in
Radiation Oncology, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0487-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cynthia Aristei, Isabella Palumbo, Lorenzo Falcinelli, Rossana Crisci, Laura Cardinali, Barbara Palumbo, Valentina Lancellotta, Giampaolo Montesi, Gianni Gobbi, Claudio Zucchetti, Vittorio Bini

Abstract

Whole breast irradiation after conserving surgery for breast cancer requires precise definition of the target volume. The standard approach uses computed tomography (CT) images. However, since fatty breast and non-breast tissues have similar electronic densities, difficulties in differentiating between them hamper breast volume delineation. To overcome this limitation the breast contour is defined by palpation and then radio-opaque wire is put around it before the CT scan. To optimize assessment of breast margins in the cranial, caudal, medial, lateral and posterior directions, the present study evaluated palpation and CT and determined whether ultrasound (US) provided any added value. Twenty consecutive patients were enrolled after they had provided informed consent to participating in this prospective study which was approved by the Regional Public Health Ethics Committee. Palpation and US defined breast margins and each contour was marked and outlined with a fine plastic wire. Breasts were then contoured on axial CT images using the breast window width (WW) and window level (WL) (401 and 750 Hounsfield Units -HU- respectively), at which setting the plastic wires were invisible. Then, the lung window function (WW 1601 HU; WL -300 HU) was inserted to visualize the plastic wires which were used as guidelines to contour the palpable and US breast volumes. As each wire had a different diameter, both volumes were easily defined on CT slices. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics, percentage overlap and reproducibility measures (agreement and reliability). Volumes: US gave the largest and palpation the smallest. Agreement was best between palpation and CT. Reliability was almost perfect in all correlations. Extensions: Cranial and posterior were highest with US and smallest with palpation. Agreement was best between palpation and CT in all extensions except the cranial. Since strong to almost perfect agreement emerged for all comparisons, reliability was high. US may be useful in defining the cranial and posterior extensions, mainly when tumours are localized there. This study demonstrates that the now standard radio-opaque wires around the palpable breast may not be needed in breast contouring.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Social Sciences 2 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 5 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 August 2015.
All research outputs
#12,619,399
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#486
of 2,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,746
of 266,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#13
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,056 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 266,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.