ArticleDiagnostic cytopathology2016
Diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology with fine needle aspiration specimens for cervical lymphadenopathy.
Article in Diagnostic cytopathology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility of liquid-based cytology and cell block obtained by vitrectomy under infusion to diagnose vitreoretinal lymphoma.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Classification of superficial suspected lymph nodes: non-invasive radiomic model based on multiphase contrast-enhanced ultrasound for therapeutic options of lymphadenopathy.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Comparison of liquid based cytology and conventional smears on lymph node aspirates: A cytomorphological study.CytoJournal · 2024Article
- Deep learning radiomics of dual-modality ultrasound images for hierarchical diagnosis of unexplained cervical lymphadenopathy.BMC medicine · 2022Article
- A retrospective study of parotid gland tumors at a single institution.Oncology letters · 2022Article
- The outcomes and decision-making process for neck lymph nodes with indeterminate fine-needle aspiration cytology.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical lymphadenopathy is a symptom that is frequently seen among outpatients, and it is important to differentiate malignant lesions from reactive lymphoid hyperplasia. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology has been widely used for the diagnosis of cervical lymphadenopathy. However, some limitations of the diagnostic accuracy using conventional smear (CS) cytology have been pointed out. The diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology (LBC) with FNA specimens has not yet been fully proven.
methodsForty-two patients with cervical lymphadenopathy who underwent FNA with CS cytology from 2007 to 2011 and 123 patients who underwent FNA with LBC utilizing LBCPREP2™ from 2011 to 2015 were studied. Diagnostic values were compared between the CS and the LBC groups.
resultsOf the total 165 patients representing the combined CS and LBC groups, 81 (49.1%) were diagnosed as benign lymph node and 84 (50.9%) were malignant diseases including 37 (22.4%) of metastatic carcinoma except for thyroid carcinoma, 30 (18.2%) of metastatic thyroid carcinoma, and 17 (10.3%) of malignant lymphoma. The overall statistical values including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the CS were 75%, 100%, 100%, 78.9%, and 87.1%, respectively, whereas those values for LBC were 91.2%, 100%, 100%, 90.7%, and 95.3%, respectively. The sensitivity of LBC for malignant diseases tended to be higher than that of CS cytology (p = 0.081).
conclusionLBC with FNA specimens from cervical lymphadenopathy is a useful and reliable method for the diagnosis of malignant diseases, especially of metastatic carcinomas, due to its increased sensitivity compared with CS cytology.
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.