SynthesisCancer medicine2025
Diagnostic Performance and Safety of Ultrasound-Guided Core Needle Biopsy for Diagnosing Lymphoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic performance and timeliness of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy for peripheral lymphadenopathy in Internal Medicine: a multicenter real-world study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Canadian Hematology Consensus Group Recommendations for the Management of Relapsed and/or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Economic and Health System Impact of Implementing the SOUND Trial Approach in Early-Stage Breast Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
- Primary breast diffuse large B-cell lymphoma mimicking breast carcinoma: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Navigating Biopsy Safety: Complication Rates Under Ultrasound and CT Guidance.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLymphoma arises from transformed lymphoid cells. Although surgical excision biopsy is the standard diagnostic tool for patients with lymphoma, image-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) or core needle biopsy (CNB) is considered an alternative diagnostic option.
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic accuracy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided core needle biopsy (CNB) in patients with lymphoma.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. A literature search was performed up to January 1, 2024, using the Ovid-MELIBE and EMBASE databases to identify studies focusing on US-guided CNB in lymphoma patients. Relevant outcomes, including sensitivity, specificity, and complication rates, were extracted from the included studies. The Der-Simonian-Laird random-effects model was applied to analyze the pooled data.
resultsThe pooled sensitivity of US-guided CNB in lymphoma patients was 94% (95% CI = 89%-96%), and the specificity was 100% (95% CI = 94%-100%). The pooled complication rate was 1% (95% CI = 0%-3%), with self-limiting complications being the most common.
conclusionUS-guided CNB demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and low complication rates in patients with lymphoma, supporting its use as an alternative diagnostic tool.
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.