ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Diagnostic Yield of Cytology, Imprint Cytology, and Histopathology in Medical Thoracoscopic Pleural Biopsies: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Pleural effusion is a common clinical problem with varied etiologies. Timely diagnosis is essential for appropriate treatment. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of brush cytology and imprint cytology, with histopathology, in pleural biopsy specimens obtained via thoracoscopy. Methods This prospective observational study included 96 patients with undiagnosed exudative pleural effusion undergoing medical thoracoscopy. Biopsy samples were analyzed by histopathology, brush cytology, and imprint cytology. Diagnostic metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), McNemar's test, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and logistic regression, were computed. Results Imprint cytology demonstrated higher sensitivity (73.17%) and NPV (76.60%) compared to brush cytology (65.85% and 72.00%, respectively). Logistic regression showed that a positive imprint result predicted biopsy positivity with an odds ratio of 5.17. ROC analysis confirmed superior diagnostic performance for imprint cytology. Conclusion Imprint cytology is a reliable, rapid, and effective diagnostic tool in thoracoscopic pleural biopsy evaluation, with performance metrics approaching those of histopathology.
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.