ArticleHeliyon2024
Accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for small cervical lymph nodes: A retrospective review of 505 cases.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Head-to-head pathologic validation of Node-RADS vs size-based criteria for cervical lymph node metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.European radiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of ultrasound-guided biopsy techniques for level IV lymph nodes: semiautomatic vs. Menghini modified needles in a retrospective dual-center study.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-guided fine-needle cytology for cervical lymph nodes: a tertiary centre's experience with the Sydney system.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Ancient schwannoma of the submandibular gland.BMJ case reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The overall diagnostic value of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is not as excellent as that of core needle biopsy (CNB). Limited research has investigated small cervical lymph nodes inaccessible to ultrasound-guided CNB due to technical challenges associated with their small size. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of ultrasound-guided FNA in determining the etiology of small cervical lymph nodes. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent FNA between May 2018 and May 2021 at our hospital. Cytological, histopathological, and clinical follow-up data were analyzed. The diagnostic yield of FNA was assessed based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy calculations. Results: This study included 505 patients, each with a small cervical lymph node under evaluation (total number of lymph nodes: 505). The average maximal diameter of the lymph nodes was 14.6 ± 6.2 mm. According to the Sydney system, the cytology results were as follows: Category I in 26 lymph nodes (5.1 %); Category II in 269 (53.3 %); Category III in 35 (6.9 %); Category IV in 17 (3.4 %); and Category V in 158 (31.3 %). We identified 212 malignant cases (203 metastases and 9 lymphomas) and 293 benign lymph nodes. FNA achieved high sensitivity (88.8 %), specificity (99.6 %), PPV (99.4 %), NPV (91.8 %), and overall accuracy (94.8 %) in determining the etiology of small cervical lymph nodes. Conclusion: FNA cytology is suitable for small lesions inaccessible by CNB and provides a diagnostic basis for implementing clinically appropriate treatment measures.
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.