Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40978065›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025

Comparative analysis of diagnostic accuracy between transoral and submental contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided biopsy for tonsillar tumors.

Ting Wei, Man Lu, Tingting Li, Ziyue Hu, Lu Wang, Juan Li, Jiulong Dai, Xiaobo Wu, Bo Tan, Fawei He and 2 more

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Ting WeiDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Man LuDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Tingting LiDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Ziyue HuDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Lu WangDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Juan LiDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Jiulong DaiDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Xiaobo WuDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Bo TanDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Fawei HeDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Yuan LiDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Wei YangDepartment of Ultrasound Medical Center, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy and safety of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)-guided transoral and submental core needle biopsy (CNB) techniques in patients with suspected tonsillar masses, and to identify which approach offers superior diagnostic performance with fewer complications. Methods: Between November 2019 and March 2024, 41 patients with suspected tonsillar masses were enrolled in this comparative study of two biopsy techniques. Each patient underwent either a transoral CNB or a submental CNB. Diagnostic metrics, including accuracy, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated for each method. Pain levels before and after the procedures were recorded to evaluate patient discomfort, and any complications were documented to evaluate safety. Statistical analyses were conducted to determine whether differences in diagnostic performance, biopsy time, and complication rates between the two techniques were significant. Results: A total of 41 patients were included in the analysis (transoral CNB, n = 22; submental CNB, n = 19). The transoral approach demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy (95.45% vs. 89.47%), sensitivity (91.67% vs. 87.5%), and NPV (90.91% vs. 60.00%) compared with the submental approach; PPV was 100% for both methods. Pre- and post-biopsy pain scores were similar in both groups, with no significant differences observed. No significant complications occurred in the transoral group. In the submental group, two patients developed minor acute submandibular adenitis; however, this difference in complication rates (0% vs. 10.5%) was not statistically significant (P = 0.21). Conclusion: The transoral CEUS-guided CNB approach demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy and lower post-procedural complication rates than the submental method in the evaluation of tonsillar tumors. These findings support the transoral route as the preferred technique for obtaining tonsillar biopsy specimens and may inform clinical practice changes aimed at improving patient outcomes through more accurate and timely diagnosis.

Indexed as

biopsyneedle biopsysubmental approachtonsil neoplasmstransoral approachultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID40978065

DOI10.3389/fonc.2025.1513756

PMCPMC12446047

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.