ArticleEndocrine2024
Timing of the repeat thyroid fine-needle aspiration biopsy: does early repeat biopsy change the rate of nondiagnostic or atypia of undetermined significance cytology result?
Article in Endocrine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk-adapted trajectory selection for ultrasound-guided thyroid fine-needle aspiration biopsy: a multicenter study of in-plane and out-of-plane approaches.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Necessity of Repeat Biopsy in Patients with Thyroid Nodules Classified as Atypia of Undetermined Significance (AUS) Based on Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy Results.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether early repeat fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNA) has an effect on adequate or atypia of undetermined significance (AUS) cytology rates in thyroid nodules with inadequate or AUS result in the first FNA.
methodsNodules of patients who underwent repeat biopsy due to insufficient or AUS cytology between 2019-2022 were included. Data of the patients and ultrasonographic, cytological and histopathological results of the nodules were recorded. Additionally, the time between the two biopsies was noted. The first was called "initial" and the second was called "rebiopsy". Five different paired groups were formed according to the time between two consecutive biopsies; before and after 1 month, 45 days, 2 months, 3 months, and 6 months. The groups were compared in terms of adequate and AUS cytological results.
resultsWe evaluated 1129 patients with 2187 nodules undergoing FNAB. After excluding nodules with one FNA result and/or missing data, 966 nodules of 628 patients who underwent FNA at least twice were included. Initial cytology was nondiagnostic (ND) in 665 (30.4%) and AUS in 301 (13.8%) nodules. The mean age of the patients was 52.0 ± 11.9 years, and the female sex ratio was 78.8% (n = 495). There were no differences in adequate or AUS rebiopsy results according to the different time interval groups (p > 0.05 for all). AUS result was statistically insignificantly more frequent in nodules with initially AUS nodules when rebiopsy was performed before 1 month in comparison to after 1 month (53.8%, 27.1%; p = 0.054). Accuracy of rebiopsy was also similar in the time intervals groups (p > 0.05 for all).
conclusionIn patients with inadequate or AUS initial biopsy, the rate of adequate or AUS cytology results at rebiopsy did not vary with the timing of repeat biopsy indicating that there may be no need to wait 1 month for a repeat biopsy. In patients with suspicious nodules, biopsy might be repeated before 1 month.
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.