ReviewHNO2023
[Indications for fine-needle aspiration and core needle biopsy for diagnosis of salivary gland tumors].
Review in HNO, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Multiparametric Ultrasound for Preoperative Assessment of Parotid Tumors: A Novel Diagnostic Pathway.Head & neck · 2026Article
- The Myriad Spectrum of Salivary Gland Lesions: Cytohistological Correlation on Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology, Core Needle Biopsy, and Resections in a 5-Year Single Institutional Experience of North India.Diagnostic cytopathology · 2025Observational
- Article
- An Institutional Experience of Core Needle Biopsy with Cooperative Implementation by Pathologists and Head and Neck Oncologists in Salivary Gland Carcinoma.Head and neck pathology · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- The Milan system for reporting salivary gland cytopathology-A single-center study of 2156 cases.Cancer medicine · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSalivary gland malignancies are rare neoplasms of the head and neck area. Preoperative clinical and imaging assessment of salivary gland masses is challenging. However, preoperative identification of malignancy is crucial for further treatment and for the course of the disease.
objectiveThis article presents the advantages and disadvantages of fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and core needle biopsy (CNB). Additionally, the sensitivity and specificity of both methods for predicting malignancy were analyzed. Furthermore, it is discussed which procedure is suitable for the diagnostic work-up of salivary gland tumors. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis current article summarizes important and recent studies in the field of the diagnostic work-up for salivary gland lesions, with discussion of original articles, metanalyses, and systematic reviews concerning FNAC and CNB.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity of the predictive ability of FNAC for malignancy is described at between 70.0-80.0% and 87.5-97.9%. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for CNB were 92.0-98.0% and 95.0-100.0%, respectively. Tumor cell seeding or facial nerve palsy are very rare complications of both procedures.
conclusionIf malignancy is suspected based on clinical examination or imaging, FNAC or CNB should be performed. FNAC is easy to perform; however, an onsite cytologist is necessary. CNB has a higher sensitivity for routine diagnosis of malignancy; tumor typing and grading is facilitated by preserving the histological architecture. In conclusion, CNB is the procedure of choice in the diagnostic work-up for suspected malignant salivary gland tumors.
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.