ArticleCytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology2025
Reporting Bone Cytopathology-A Proposal Based on a Single Tertiary Centre Experience.
Article in Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) from bone lesions has been proven to be a useful diagnostic tool but lacks standardisation. The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of FNAC as a basis to propose and test a reporting system for bone reporting cytopathology.
methodsThis retrospective study is based on patients with bone lesions, that were approached by cytology at Skåne University Hospital, Sweden between 2015 and 2023. The diagnostic performance was measured by sensitivity, specificity and accuracy analyses. All diagnoses were then distributed in six categories: (I) Non-diagnostic, (II) Benign, (III) Atypia, (IV) Bone neoplasm of uncertain significance, (V) Suspicious for malignancy and (VI) Malignant. The risk of malignancy (ROM) in each category was calculated.
resultsThe final cohort consisted of 721 cases. Bone cytology was able to differentiate between benign and malignant lesion with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 99%. The overall diagnostic accuracy was 65% but varied significantly among different types of lesions. Within the tested diagnostic categories, the ROM was (I) 48%, (II) 6.7%, (III) 69%, (IV) 28%, (V) 93% and (VI) 100%.
conclusionFNAC from bone lesions is a sensitive and specific diagnostic tool with high diagnostic accuracy among various tumour types. This study provides valuable insights for the development of a standardised reporting system for bone cytopathology.
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.