ArticleJournal of hematopathology2025
Comparative analysis on efficacy of lymph node sampling through whole node excision versus core needle biopsy: focusing on diagnostic yield for interpretation.
Article in Journal of hematopathology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe interpretation of lymph node biopsy is influenced by factors inherent to the type of biopsy. In recent times, core needle biopsies (CNB) have increasingly been preferred over whole node excision (WNE) for sampling lymph nodes. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic efficacy of CNB and WNE in diagnosing lymph node pathologies and to evaluate the diagnostic challenges in interpreting CNB. MATERIAL AND
methodsLymph node biopsies (CNB and WNE) received over 5.5 years were analyzed using hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stain and immunohistochemistry (IHC). The percentage of cases diagnosed on morphology alone and with IHC in each group was evaluated. Cases that did not have a definitive diagnosis, even after the application of IHC, were analyzed.
resultsA total of 751 lymph node biopsies were studied, comprising 222 CNB and 529 WNE. Based on morphology alone (± special stains), the diagnosis could be established in 63/222 (28.4%) cases on CNB and 308/529 (58.2%) of WNE. After IHC, a diagnosis could be rendered in 65.8% of CNB, compared to 95.8% of WNE. Thus, 17.6% of CNB remained inconclusive even after IHC, and 16.7% of CNB had inadequate or nonrepresentative tissue. CNB was more prone to fragmentation, cellular distortion, crushing, and shrinkage, thereby challenging the interpretation.
conclusionWNE offers a significantly higher diagnostic yield and provides complete nodal architecture and fewer tissue artefacts, making it a superior sampling technique to CNB for diagnosing lymph node lesions. Inconclusive diagnoses on CNB are due to a lack of architectural pattern, limited tissue, nonrepresentative sampling, and procedural artefacts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41087604What 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.