Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39202289›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Sydney Reporting System for Lymph Node Fine-Needle Aspiration and Malignancy Risk Stratification: Is It of Clinical Value?

Doaa Alqaidy, Hind Althomali, Amal Almaghrabi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Doaa AlqaidyDepartment of Pathology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 22252, Saudi Arabia.
Hind AlthomaliDepartment of Pathology, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah 22252, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0008-4651-3764
Amal AlmaghrabiDepartment of Pathology, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah 22252, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lymphadenopathy is a common presentation of both reactive and malignant diseases, and lymph node fine-needle aspiration cytology (LN-FNAC) is an effective and inexpensive screening method. It can prevent unnecessary invasive surgery and excisional biopsy, especially in benign cases. Unfortunately, the lack of universally accepted terminology for reporting results has hindered its widespread support. The Sydney system proposal for lymph node cytopathology categorization and reporting introduced five diagnostic categories to address the lack of universally accepted terminology for reporting results in lymphadenopathy. Our study analyzed 188 lymph node fine-needle cytology (FNC) samples from King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Saudi Arabia, examining clinical follow-up data, pathology records, patient information, and final diagnosis from January 2019 to December 2022. Most specimens were from axillary lymph nodes, with 99.5% tissue correlation. The Sydney system category classification identified 56.9% of cases as malignant, while 26.1% were benign. The final surgical specimen diagnosis revealed a higher percentage of malignant diagnoses, with the highest risk of malignancy (ROM) in malignant/category V. In conclusion, our study demonstrates that LN-FNAC offers high diagnostic accuracy for lymph node (LN) aspirates, with the Sydney approach potentially aiding risk stratification and achieving consistency in cytologic diagnosis, but further multi-centric research is needed.

Indexed as

fine-needle aspirationlymph node cytologyrisk of malignancySydney reporting system

Identifiers

PMID39202289
PMCPMC11354132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.