ArticleLa Radiologia medica2018
Concordance between fine-needle aspiration and core biopsies for osseous lesions by lesion imaging appearance and CT attenuation.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2018. 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.
- The utility of 2-[European radiology · 2021Article
- Positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging appearance of benign and classic "do not touch" osseous lesions.World journal of radiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the concordance between fine-needle aspiration and core biopsies for osseous lesions by lesion imaging appearance and CT attenuation. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective review of 215 FNAs of osseous lesions performed in conjunction with core biopsy at our institution over a 6-year period (2011-2016). FNAs were interpreted independently of core biopsies. We assessed if FNA in conjunction with core biopsy increased diagnostic accuracy compared to core biopsy alone. We also calculated the concordance between FNA and core biopsy by lesion appearance, lesion CT attenuation, lesion histology, lesion location and FNA needle gauge size.
resultsCore biopsy alone provided the diagnosis in 207/215 cases (96.3%), however, the FNA provided the diagnosis in the remaining 8/215 cases (3.7%) where the core biopsy was non-diagnostic. There were 154 (71.6%) lytic lesions, 21 (9.8%) blastic lesions, 25 (11.6%) mixed lytic and blastic lesions and 15 (7.0%) lesions that were neither lytic nor blastic. The concordance between FNA and core biopsy for lytic osseous lesions (136/154 cases, 88.3%) was statistically significantly higher than that for blastic osseous lesions (13/21 cases, 61.9%) [P = 4.2 × 10
conclusionFNA with core biopsy increases diagnostic rate compared to core biopsy alone or FNA alone. The concordance between FNA and core biopsy is higher for lytic lesions than for blastic lesions; and higher for low-attenuation lesions than for high-attenuation lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29249078What 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.