ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2025
Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasound in Neck Node NI-RADS Category 2.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- NI-RADS in posttreatment head and neck cancer surveillance: a framework for standardized imaging with clinical impact.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) scoring system standardized imaging surveillance of head and neck (H&N) cancer with risk classification. A nodal NI-RADS score of 2 on contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) of the neck indicates low suspicion for recurrence/persistent disease, and close follow-up or addition of PET is recommended. The unclear follow-up imaging findings and/or mild FDG uptake raise the patient's anxiety about potential delay in diagnosis and intervention while adding high imaging costs. Therefore, at our institution, diagnostic ultrasound (US)/US-guided fine-needle aspiration (US-FNA) is incorporated into our paradigm. We aim to evaluate US performance in nodal NI-RADS 2 on CECT as an alternative valuable tool in surveillance imaging guidelines. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective database search (2019-2024) for patients with primary H&N cancer (excluding thyroid cancer and melanoma), a single index neck node NI-RADS 2 on surveillance neck CECT, and a neck US/US-FNA performed within 3 months afterward for evaluation of the NI-RADS 2 node. We categorized US/US-FNA results as positive or negative and reviewed clinical and imaging follow-up, management, and nodal disease status up to 1 year following US. The incidence of nodal recurrence and US diagnostic performance were evaluated.
resultsOf 90 patients, 36 (40%) had normal diagnostic US with no FNA performed and were thus considered negative, and 54 patients (60%) had abnormal US and hence concurrent US-FNA. Eighteen (33.3%) US-FNAs were positive for tumor: 27 with normal lymphoid tissue and 9 with indeterminate cytology (no viable malignant cells, acellular or atypia) were considered negative (66.7%). All positive US-FNAs resulted in management changes. Two patients with normal diagnostic US, 1 with negative FNA, and 1 with indeterminate FNA developed recurrence in these nodes within 1 year. The incidence of US-detected malignancy was 20% in patients with a nodal NI-RADS 2, surpassing the published rate of 14.3%. The sensitivity, accuracy, and negative predictive value of US/US-FNA in detecting tumor recurrence/persistence in nodal NI-RADS 2 are 81.8%, 95.6%, and 94.4%, respectively.
conclusionsUltrasound demonstrated good diagnostic performance in the detection of nodal recurrence in patients with NI-RADS 2 on CECT. Its role as an alternative tool in surveillance should be considered.
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.