The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.04.036
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Implementing the SAVI SCOUT System in Community Radiology Practice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
5
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, it was in a device inserted closer to the skin than usual ( Figure 3 ). This is in contrast to the literature, which reports that the signal is more likely to fail at depths greater than 4 cm [ 33 ]. We believe this signal failure may have been due to overhead theatre lights interfering with the device and we therefore initially recommend that the reflector is deployed behind the lesion for superficially located masses.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 96%
“…Interestingly, it was in a device inserted closer to the skin than usual ( Figure 3 ). This is in contrast to the literature, which reports that the signal is more likely to fail at depths greater than 4 cm [ 33 ]. We believe this signal failure may have been due to overhead theatre lights interfering with the device and we therefore initially recommend that the reflector is deployed behind the lesion for superficially located masses.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 96%
“…It has been found to be at least non-inferior to WGL in terms of successful localisation and margin positivity rates. In addition, the device was reported to have minimal MRI void artefacts (<5 mm), in addition to good surgeon, patient and radiologist acceptability [ 46 , 47 , 48 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the Savi Scout technique is marred by its high initial cost of implementation and the larger than desired size of marker (12 mm), which limits its use in the axilla. In addition, its range is limited to 4cm in depth, and could be affected by blood pooling, which may interfere with infra-red detection, occasionally resulting in failed localization of the reflector (8,29).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%