ArticleIranian journal of pathology2018
Diagnostic Utility and Efficacy of Conventional Versus SurePath® Liquid-based Cytology in Head and Neck Pathology: A Study in an Indian Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in Iranian journal of pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Osteolipoma: An Extremely Rare Hard Palate Tumor.Cureus · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
objectiveLiquid-based cytology (LBC) is an emerging pathological method for better establishment of the diagnosis in almost all the organs of the body. It is currently used both for the gynecological and non-gynecological (fine-needle aspirates (FNAs)/fluid) specimens in most of the developed and few developing countries. The current study aimed at assessing and illustrating the cytological morphology on SurePath® LBC technique when used on FNAs from head and neck lesions, compared to the conventional smears (CS).
methodsIn the current prospective study, a total of 1000 FNAs obtained from swellings of head and neck region were simultaneously processed both by the standard conventional and SurePath® LBC techniques. Both of these preparations were studied, compared with a semi-quantitative scoring system, and statistically analyzed.
resultsLBC smears were better, compared to CS ones, due to the presence of evenly dispersed cells (
conclusionLBC, though costly, is an acceptable, simple, and valuable technique. However, CS still cannot be considered inferior to it, and it is recommended that in most of the cases LBC, along with CS, should be reported before reaching a final diagnosis. This is beneficial especially in the developing countries such as India where most of the centers are devoid of LBC technique and hence, are not familiar with many cytomorphological features and potential diagnostic pitfalls unique to it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30697289PMC6339502What 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.