Trial reportPloS one2025
Spinal needles versus conventional needles for fine-needle aspiration biopsy of thyroid nodules-A multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a theoretical test for ultrasound-guided biopsy competence in the head and neck.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveUltrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) is essential for evaluating thyroid nodules but often yields inadequate samples, leading to repeated procedures, increased discomfort, and higher costs. Previous non-randomized studies found promising results of spinal needles to improve diagnostic adequacy. Therefore, we conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to validate these findings.
methodsBetween July 1st, 2021, and April 13th, 2023, patients with suspicious thyroid nodules were randomized to receive FNAB with either a 25G spinal needle or conventional needle. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate diagnostic cytology. Secondary outcomes included procedure-related pain, sensitivity and specificity of FNAB, and adverse events.
resultsA total of 359 patients (75.6% female), with a mean age of 59.7 years (range 23-94) were randomized. The rate of adequate diagnostic FNAB was 86.2% (156/181) for the spinal group compared to 84.8% (151/178) for the control group (OR 1.01; 95% CI: 0.95-1.08). The mean pain scale score was 4.0 (SD = 1.8) in the spinal group and 3.9 (SD = 2.0) in the control group (p = 0.40). No complications were observed in either group. We found a significantly better cytological adequacy rate of FNABs performed by physicians with more than four years of experience in the procedure (OR=1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.14).
conclusionsNo significant improvement was found using spinal needles with a stylet compared to conventional needles. Given the significantly higher cost of spinal needles and comparable diagnostic outcomes, their routine use for thyroid FNAB is not recommended.
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.