ArticleEuropean oral research2026
Diagnostic concordance between incisional biopsies and final excision specimens in maxillofacial Lesions: a 14-Year retrospective study.
Article in European oral research, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the concordance between the histopathological diagnoses obtained from biopsies of maxillofacial lesions and the definitive histopathological diagnoses of the excised specimens, and to identify factors associated with diagnostic discordance. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 203 patients with maxillofacial lesions who underwent surgical excision following biopsy between 2005 and 2019. Sociodemographic, clinical, and histopathological data were collected and analyzed. Biopsy diagnoses were compared with the final excision diagnoses using Cohen's kappa coefficient and appropriate statistical tests. Results: The histopathological diagnosis of the excised specimen was consistent with the biopsy diagnosis in 87.8% of cases (p = 0.001). No significant differences were found between biopsy and excision diagnoses when the biopsy was performed by a specialist or a resident (p = 0.29), or when the histopathological evaluation was conducted by a resident or a specialist pathologist (p = 0.59). Likewise, no significant differences were observed according to whether the biopsy specimen consisted of a single fragment or multiple fragments (p = 0.65). Conclusion: Careful identification and management of factors contributing to diagnostic discordance may improve the reliability of biopsy diagnoses and consequently enhance patient management.
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.