ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2022
Evaluation of the contribution of fine-needle non-aspiration cytology to diagnosis in cases with pulmonary malignant lesions.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFine-needle non-aspiration cytology (FNNAC) is an easy-to-apply, minimally invasive diagnostic method that contributes to the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer. FNNAC can be performed from peripheral lymph nodes as well as in peripheral lung lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the contribution of FNNAC performed from peripheral lesions or lymph nodes to diagnosis in patients with pulmonary malignant lesions.
methodsFNNAC was applied from a peripherally located mass in the lung, chest wall lesion, or peripheral lymph node using a needle without an injector or active suction. The collected material was evaluated using the cytoblock method. The FNNAC accuracy was obtained by dividing the true positivity value by a number of needle biopsies performed. The 95% confidence interval of the obtained rate was also calculated.
resultsThe mean age of 56 patients, two female (3.6%) and 54 male (96.4%), was 63.9 ± 9.1 (38-80) years. FNNAC was performed from the peripheral lymph node in 48 patients, the peripheral pulmonary lesion in four, and the accompanying chest wall lesion in four. While true positivity was present in 42 patients, two patients had true negativity, and 12 had false negativity. In five of the 12 cases reported as false negative, the collected material was evaluated as insufficient, while the malignant diagnoses of the remaining seven cases were confirmed by other diagnostic methods. The diagnostic success of FNNAC was determined as 78.57% (95% CI: 65.56-88.41). FNNAC was more successful in diagnosis when performed from the peripheral lymph node compared to the peripheral pulmonary lesion (p=0.033).
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.