Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39545274›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2025

A systematic review of ultrasonography-guided transcutaneous fine needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of laryngeal malignancy.

A Ahmed, D Yang, M Eastwood, T Saunders, S F Ahsan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

A AhmedNorthern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
D YangShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, UK.
M EastwoodShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, UK.
T SaundersShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, UK.
S F AhsanShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDirect laryngoscopy and biopsy is the gold standard for obtaining a tissue diagnosis in patients with suspected laryngeal cancer. In patients with advanced disease or other medical comorbidities, this may come with significant anaesthetic risks, including tracheostomy. Ultrasonography-guided biopsy has been widely used in the diagnosis of malignancy involving cervical lymph nodes but it is not commonly employed in the diagnosis of laryngeal tumours. A systematic review was undertaken to assess the literature looking at whether ultrasonography-guided transcutaneous fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is an adequate method in diagnosing laryngeal malignancy.

methodsTwo independent researchers conducted a systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE

resultsA total of 568 studies were identified from the search, of which 3 met the inclusion criteria, resulting in 162 patient episodes. The pooled accuracy of transcutaneous FNAC in acquiring a sample adequate for histological diagnosis was 74.9%. Data on complications were limited, with a few cases of mild haemoptysis being recorded.

conclusionsTranscutaneous FNAC can be considered a safe and quick method for establishing a histological diagnosis of laryngeal lesions, particularly in patients who may be severely comorbid, and it could therefore could reduce the risks of general anaesthesia and tracheostomy prior to commencing definitive treatment.

Indexed as

Biopsy, Fine-NeedleLaryngeal NeoplasmsUltrasonography, InterventionalEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationHumansImage-Guided BiopsyLarynxfine needle aspirationlaryngeal cancerultrasonography guided

Identifiers

PMID39545274
PMCPMC12043362

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.