ArticleEuropean radiology2018
Efficacy of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy in cervical lymphadenopathy: A retrospective study of 6,695 cases.
Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 83 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance and timeliness of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy for peripheral lymphadenopathy in Internal Medicine: a multicenter real-world study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Head-to-head pathologic validation of Node-RADS vs size-based criteria for cervical lymph node metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.European radiology · 2026Article
- Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Cervical Lymph Nodes Using a Multi-Modal Ultrasound-Based Machine Learning Model With SHAP Interpretability.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2026Review
- Comparison of ultrasound-guided biopsy techniques for level IV lymph nodes: semiautomatic vs. Menghini modified needles in a retrospective dual-center study.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Lymph Node Assessment with Multiparametric Ultrasound: Normal Values, Morphologic Patterns, and Diagnostic Algorithms.Cancers · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-guided fine-needle cytology for cervical lymph nodes: a tertiary centre's experience with the Sydney system.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Percutaneous Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy for Sampling Neck Lesions.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasound in Neck Node NI-RADS Category 2.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Percutaneous core needle biopsy guided by ultrasound: a narrative review.Journal of ultrasound · 2025Review
- Feasibility, efficacy, and safety of core needle biopsy as a first-line method for cervical lymphadenopathy.European radiology · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Biopsy Techniques for Cervical Lymphoma: A Retrospective Cohort Review.The Permanente journal · 2025Article
- Quantitative vascular feature-based multimodality prediction model for multi-origin malignant cervical lymphadenopathy.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Improved diagnosis of small cervical lymph node metastasis using postvascular phase perfluorobutane CEUS in cancer patients.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Analysis of bleeding after ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy of infected cervical lymph nodes.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- CT-guided core needle biopsies of head and neck tumors: a comprehensive monocenter analysis of safety and outcomes.European radiology · 2024Article
- Accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for small cervical lymph nodes: A retrospective review of 505 cases.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical Role of Upfront F-18 FDG PET/CT in Determining Biopsy Sites for Lung Cancer Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Ultrasound-guided hookwire localization of non palpable cervical lymphadenopathy: A case-control study of operative time.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Analysis of bleeding after ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of benign cervical lymph nodes.BMC surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the diagnostic yield of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy (US-CNB) in cervical lymphadenopathy and identify the factors influencing the diagnostic accuracy of US-CNB.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of 6,603 patients with cervical lymphadenopathy who underwent 6695 US-CNB procedures between 2004 and 2017.
resultsAdequate specimens were obtained in 92.19 % (6,172/6,695) of cases. Most lymph nodes (67.65 %) were malignant (metastatic carcinoma 4,131; lymphoma 398). The overall accuracy of US-CNB for differentiating benign from malignant lesions was 91.70 % (6,139/6,695). Among biopsies in which adequate material was obtained, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of US-CNB were 99.70 %, 100 % and 99.46 %, respectively. The success or failure of US-CNB for the diagnosis of lymphadenopathy was significantly correlated with node size, nature (malignant vs. benign), and location as well as penetration depth, but not with needle size (p = 0.665), number of core tissues obtained (p = 0.324), or history of malignancy (p = 0.060). There were no major procedure-related complications.
conclusionsUS-CNB is a safe and effective method of diagnosing cervical lymphadenopathy, and our findings may help optimise the sampling procedure by maximising its diagnostic accuracy and preserving its minimally invasive nature. KEY POINTS: • US-CNB is useful for the diagnosis of cervical lymphadenopathy. • US-CNB is safe to perform on lymph nodes located near vital structures. • Larger, malignant, level IV lymph nodes yield sufficient tissue samples more easily.
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.