ArticleWorld journal of urology2013
What is the added value of combined core biopsy and fine needle aspiration in the diagnostic process of renal tumours?
Article in World journal of urology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostics and prognostic evaluation in renal cell tumors: the German S3 guidelines recommendations.World journal of urology · 2022Pooled it
- Cytological Diagnosis by Fine-Needle Aspiration or Core Biopsy with Touch Preparation for Renal Cystic or Solid Lesions: A Single-Center Clinicopathological Analysis.Acta cytologica · 2025Article
- Sequential liquid-based cytology based on exfoliative cells of 18-gauge core needle groove to improve renal mass core needle biopsy yield: a real-world observational study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Renal Oncocytoma: The Diagnostic Challenge to Unmask the Double of Renal Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Customized Tool for the Validation of Optical Coherence Tomography in Differentiation of Prostate Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatment · 2017Article
- Subtyping of renal cortical neoplasms in fine needle aspiration biopsies using a decision tree based on genomic alterations detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization.BJU international · 2014Article
- Current status of renal biopsy for small renal masses.Korean journal of urology · 2014Review
- The impact of location and number of cores on the diagnostic accuracy of renal mass biopsy: an ex vivo study.World journal of urology · 2013Article
- Spectrum of Renal Tumors Other Than Renal Cell Carcinoma with Emphasis on Cytomorphological, Immunohistochemical, and Cytogenetic Study.Journal of cytologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNon-diagnostic results still hinder the routine use of core biopsy (CB) and fine needle aspiration (FNA) in the diagnostic process of renal tumours. Furthermore, substantial interobserver variability has been reported. We assessed the added value of combining the results of CB and FNA by five pathologists in the ex vivo diagnosis of renal mass.
methodsTwo ex vivo core biopsies were taken followed by two FNA passes from extirpated tumours. All samples were evaluated by five blinded pathologists. A consensus diagnosis of the surgical specimen was the index for comparison. For each pathologist, the number of non-diagnostic (non-conclusive or undetermined biology and failed biopsies), correct and incorrect scored cases of each technique was assessed. When a non-diagnostic CB or FNA had a correct diagnostic counterpart, this was considered as of added value.
resultsOf the 57 assessed tumours, 53 were malignant. CB was non-diagnostic in 4-10 cases (7-17.5%). FNA established the correct diagnosis in 1-7 of these cases. FNA was non-diagnostic in 2-6 cases (3.5-10.5%), and the counterpart CB established the correct diagnosis in 1-6 of these cases. For the 5 pathologists, accuracy of CB and FNA varied between 82.5-93% and 89.5-96.5%, respectively. Combination of both types of biopsy resulted in 55-57 correct results (accuracy 96.5-100%), i.e., an increase in accuracy of 3.5-14%.
conclusionCombining the result of CB and FNA in renal mass biopsy leads to a higher diagnostic accuracy. Recommendations on which technique used should be adapted to local expertise and logistic possibilities.
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.