ArticleCureus2024
Diagnostic Accuracy of a Computed Tomography-Guided Transthoracic Needle Biopsy for Ground-Glass Opacities and Subsolid Pulmonary Nodules.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The infiltration risk prediction models by logistic regression for ground-glass pulmonary nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Nomogram integrating clinical-radiological and radiomics features for differentiating invasive from non-invasive pulmonary adenocarcinomas presenting as ground-glass nodules.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose The increasing use of computed tomography (CT) imaging has led to the detection of more ground-glass nodules (GGNs) and subsolid nodules (SSNs), which may be malignant and require a biopsy for proper diagnosis. Approximately 75% of persistent GGNs can be attributed to adenocarcinoma in situ or minimally invasive adenocarcinoma. A CT-guided biopsy has been proven to be a reliable procedure with high diagnostic performance. However, the diagnostic accuracy and safety of a CT-guided biopsy for GGNs and SSNs with solid components ≤6 mm are still uncertain. The aim of this study is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of a CT-guided core needle biopsy (CNB) for GGN and SSNs with solid components ≤6 mm. Methods This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent CT-guided CNB for the evaluation of GGNs and SSNs with solid components ≤6 mm between February 2020 and January 2023. Biopsy findings were compared to the final diagnosis determined by definite histopathologic examination and clinical course. Results A total of 22 patients were enrolled, with a median age of 74 years (IQR: 68-81). A total of 22 nodules were assessed, comprising 15 (68.2%) SSNs with a solid component measuring ≤6 mm and seven (31.8%) pure GGNs. The histopathological examination revealed that 12 (54.5%) were diagnosed as malignant, nine (40.9%) as benign, and one (4.5%) as non-diagnostic. The overall diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for malignancy were 86.36% and 85.7%, respectively. Conclusion A CT-guided CNB for GGNs and SSNs with solid components measuring ≤6 mm appears to have a high diagnostic accuracy.
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.