ArticleAnnals of medicine2025
Ultrasound-guided fine-needle cytology for cervical lymph nodes: a tertiary centre's experience with the Sydney system.
Article in Annals of medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (US-FNAC) and ultrasound-guided fine-needle non-aspiration cytology (US-FNNAC) on cervical lymphadenopathies, in which the authors specifically analysed the influence of lymph node size. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 500 lymphadenopathies were retrospectively enrolled from January 2019 to July 2023. The lymph nodes were divided into four size groups: ≤5.0 mm, from 5.1 to 10.0 mm, from 10.1 to 15.0 mm and >15.0 mm. The cytohistologic diagnosis was evaluated based on the Sydney System: I. inadequate/nondiagnostic; II. benign; III. atypical cells with uncertain significance/atypical lymphoid cells with undetermined significance; IV. Suspicious and V. malignant. The diagnostic yield of US-FNAC and US-FNNAC were assessed based on sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy calculations.
resultsThe overall SEN, SPE, PPV, NPV and accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine-needle cytology were 88.7%, 89.7%, 96.2%, 72.9%, 88.9%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy and SEN of US-FNAC were superior to that of US-FNNAC in the overall cases (95.1% vs 83.9%,
conclusionsThe current findings supported the preferential use of US-FNAC over US-FNNAC in routine clinical practice for lymph node evaluation, particularly for nodes measuring 5.1-15.0 mm. For lymphadenopathies ≤5.0 mm, additional tests were required to enhance the diagnostic performance of US-FNC, with US-FNAC often being necessary. Thus, we recommended using US-FNAC to obtain cytological specimens for definitive diagnosis of cervical lymphadenopathies that ≤15.0 mm.
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.