Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22277164›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2012

Diagnostic value of fine-needle aspiration biopsy for breast mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ying-Hua Yu, Wei Wei, Jian-Lun Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Ultrasound-Guided Intervention for Breast Lesions].Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Fine-needle Aspiration Cytology to Identify a Rare Mimicker of Breast Cancer: Plasma Cell Mastitis.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The Role of Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology in Triple Assessment of Patients with Malignant Breast Lumps.Nigerian journal of surgery : official publication of the Nigerian Surgical Research Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ying-Hua YuDepartmant of Breast Surgery of Guangxi Cancer Hospital & Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning 530021, Guangxi, P.R.China.
Wei Wei
Jian-Lun Liu
Guangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) of the breast is a minimally invasive yet maximally diagnostic method. However, the clinical use of FNAB has been questioned. The purpose of our study was to establish the overall value of FNAC in the diagnosis of breast lesions.

methodsAfter a review and quality assessment of 46 studies, sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of FNAB for evaluating breast lesions were pooled using random-effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall accuracy. The sensitivity and specificity for the studies data (included unsatisfactory samples) and underestimation rate of unsatisfactory samples were also calculated.

resultsThe summary estimates for FNAB in diagnosis of breast carcinoma were as follows (unsatisfactory samples was temporarily exluded): sensitivity, 0.927 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.921 to 0.933); specificity, 0.948 (95% CI, 0.943 to 0.952); positive likelihood ratio, 25.72 (95% CI, 17.35 to 28.13); negative likelihood ratio, 0.08 (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.11); diagnostic odds ratio, 429.73 (95% CI, 241.75 to 763.87); The pooled sensitivity and specificity for 11 studies, which reported unsatisfactory samples (unsatisfactory samples was considered to be positive in this classification) were 0.920 (95% CI, 0.906 to 0.933) and 0.768 (95% CI, 0.751 to 0.784) respectively. The pooled proportion of unsatisfactory samples that were subsequently upgraded to various grade cancers was 27.5% (95% CI, 0.221 to 0.296).

conclusionsFNAB is an accurate biopsy for evaluating breast malignancy if rigorous criteria are used. With regard to unsatisfactory samples, futher invasive procedures are required in order to minimize the chance of a missed diagnosis of breast cancer.

Indexed as

Area Under CurveBiopsy, Fine-NeedleBreastBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansRegression AnalysisSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID22277164
PMCPMC3283452
OpenAlexW2064092637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.