ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Determination of axillary lymph node status by fine-needle aspiration: preoperative axillary staging
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite the common use of ultrasound (US)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) for axillary node (AN) in breast cancer patients, only a limited number of studies are available regarding the diagnostic performance of AN-FNA according to the suspicion level based on US findings. This study compares the outcomes of US-guided AN-FNA in breast cancer patients, differentiating between those undergoing staging and surveillance. Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective study with retrospective analysis was conducted on 767 consecutive AN-FNA procedures performed in 2017 at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, with 654 for staging and 113 for surveillance in breast cancer patients. The radiologists performed axillary US and the specific finding was prospectively classified into the AN-reporting and data system (AN-RADS) category 3-5 before FNA. The malignancy rate of each category was evaluated. The chi-square test, with or without Bonferroni correction, or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the malignancy rates between the staging and surveillance groups for each category. Results: Among the 767 AN-FNAs, 424 (55.3%) were malignant. The malignancy rate was significantly higher in the staging group (59.5%) than in the surveillance group (31.0%, P<0.0001). The distribution of AN-RADS categories differed between the groups (P=0.015), with 4A being the most common. The malignancy rates in categories 3, 4A, 4B, 4C, and 5 were as follows: 5.6%, 36.0%, 77.4%, 87.7%, and 98.4% in the staging group, and 0.0%, 9.7%, 53.3%, 88.9%, and 100% in the surveillance group. The malignancy rate was significantly different between the two groups only in category 4A (P=0.0001). Conclusions: AN-FNA according to AN-RADS category appears to be an appropriate method for determination of axillary nodal status. Overall malignancy rate of AN-FNA in breast cancer patients was higher in the staging group than in the surveillance group. According to the suspicion level, the difference between two groups was significant only in category 4A.
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.