ArticleOncology letters2014
Introduction and utility of liquid-based cytology on aspiration biopsy of peripheral nodular lesions of the lung.
Article in Oncology letters, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Testing in EBUS-TBNA Specimens of Lung Adenocarcinoma: A Study of Concordance Between Cell Block Method and Liquid-Based Cytology in Appraising Sample Cellularity and EGFR Mutations.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2018Article
- Comparison of Conventional Smear and Liquid-based Cytology Preparation in Diagnosis of Lung Cancer by Bronchial Wash and Transbronchial Needle Aspiration.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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, aspiration biopsy cytology (ABC) was used for the diagnosis of peripheral nodular lesions in the lung (PNLL), and liquid-based cytology (LBC) was carried out on the material collected to evaluate it in comparison with the conventional method (CM). The subjects comprised 130 cases that underwent computed tomography (CT)-guided ABC for PNLL. A total of 73 cases received a tumor resection, with a diagnosis based on the pathology, while 57 cases were followed up, as the tumor showed no change on the radiological examinations. Biopsy samples from these patients and lavage fluid from the aspiration needles were used for analysis. Cellular material was obtained by centrifugation of the lavage fluid, and samples were prepared by two methods, direct smearing and LBC according to the ThinPrep method. The samples were categorized into three diagnoses: i) Benign, ii) suspicion of malignancy and iii) malignant. Appropriate samples were collected in 72% of cases by LBC, but only in 36% of cases by the CM. There was no marked difference in cellular images between the two methods, with the exception of a few specific cases. LBC on its own provided sensitivity at 68%, specificity at 61% and accuracy at 65%, while a combination of LBC and biopsy markedly improved these figures to 94, 81 and 84%, respectively. The introduction of LBC is considered useful for the cytopathological diagnosis of PNLL by CT-guided ABC. LBC enables the examination of appropriate samples rich in cellular components and supports a biopsy-based diagnosis. A combination of these two methods provides even higher diagnostic accuracy, and LBC is considered an excellent method to evaluate these pathological samples.
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.