Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37416528›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023

The accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and core needle biopsy in diagnosing axillary lymph nodes in women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Haining Zheng, Rui Zhao, Wei Wang, Xiaona Liu, Xiaoqing Wang, Chaoyang Wen, Yubo Ren

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ISUOG/ESGO Consensus Statement on ultrasound-guided biopsy in gynecological oncology.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Haining ZhengDpartment of Ultrasound, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Rui ZhaoDpartment of Ultrasound, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Wei WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Fourth Medical Center of Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xiaona LiuDepartment of Ultrasound, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Xiaoqing WangDpartment of Ultrasound, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Chaoyang WenDpartment of Ultrasound, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yubo RenDepartment of Pathology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Peking University · CNPeking University International Hospital · CNBeijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNChinese People's Liberation Army · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (US-FNA) and core needle biopsy (US-CNB) for detecting axillary lymph nodes in women with breast cancer. Methods: Eligible studies and pertinent literature resources were identified in Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases using subject-specific keywords. Study outcomes were tested for heterogeneity, and meta-analyses were performed to estimate sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DORs). The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve analysis was also performed. Results: A total of 22 studies involving 3,548 patients were included to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of US-FNA and 11 studies involving 758 patients were included to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of US-CNB in identifying axillary lymph nodes in women with breast cancer. The accuracy of US-FNA in identifying suspicious axillary lymph nodes was as follows: overall sensitivity, 79% (95% CI: 73%-84%); global specificity, 96% (95% CI: 92%-98%); overall positive likelihood ratio, 18.55 (95% CI: 10.53-32.69); overall negative likelihood ratio, 0.22 (95% CI: 0.17-0.28); DOR, 71.68 (95% CI: 37.19-138.12); and the area under the SROC curve, 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96). The accuracy of US-CNB in identifying suspicious axillary lymph nodes was as follows: overall sensitivity, 85% (95% CI: 81%-89%); global specificity, 93% (95% CI: 87%-96%); overall positive likelihood ratio, 11.88 (95% CI: 6.56-21.50); overall negative likelihood ratio, 0.16 (95% CI: 0.12-0.21); overall DOR, 66.83 (95% CI: 33.28-134.21), and the area under SROC curve 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97). Conclusions: The results indicate that both US-FNA and US-CNB have high accuracy for suspicious axillary lymph nodes.

Indexed as

axillary lymph nodescore needle biopsydiagnostic accuracyfine-needle aspirationmeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID37416528
PMCPMC10320388
OpenAlexW4381664231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.