ArticleCureus2024
Deciphering Serous Effusions Using the New International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cytopathological evaluation of serous effusions using the ISRSFC system: Risk of malignancy and demographic associations in a Saudi cohort.Saudi medical journal · 2025Observational
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
Introduction Serous effusion cytopathology is a minimally invasive, cost-effective procedure and plays a crucial role in diagnosing a spectrum of pathological conditions, ranging from benign to malignant. The International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology (ISRSFC) offers a standardized framework for reporting serous effusions, aiding in better communication and clinical decision-making. Aims and objectives This study aimed to categorize effusions using the ISRSFC reporting system. In addition, we sought to estimate the risk of malignancy (ROM) for each diagnostic category and evaluate the diagnostic performance of conventional smear versus cell block techniques. Materials and methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Pathology over one year. We applied the ISRSFC criteria to serous effusions and categorized them accordingly. The ROM for each category was assessed with histopathology serving as the gold standard. Then, the diagnostic performance including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using conventional smear and cell block techniques. Results The study included 185 serous effusion cases, with ages ranging from two months to 85 years. The male-to-female ratio was 1.1:1. Most effusions were pleural fluids constituting about 133 cases (71.9%), followed by peritoneal fluids (47 cases, 25.4%) and pericardial fluids (five cases, 2.7%). Among the fluids, four (2.2%) were diagnosed as non-diagnostic (ND), 152 (82.2%) as negative for malignancy (NFM), four (2.2%) as atypia of undetermined significance (AUS), nine (4.8%) as suspicious for malignancy (SFM), and 16 (8.6%) as malignant (MAL). The overall ROM was 25% for ND, 8.5% for NFM, 50% for AUS, 77% for SFM, and 100% for MAL. The sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy were superior when combining conventional smear with the cell block technique. Conclusions Our findings underscore the use of ISRSFC in categorizing effusion samples, assessing the ROM, and guiding clinical management. Moreover, our study highlights the benefits of employing a combined approach using conventional smears and cell blocks for enhanced diagnostic accuracy in serous effusions.
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.