ArticleAnnals of Saudi medicine
Diagnostic utility and limitations of CT-guided transthoracic fine-needle aspiration biopsy in Lung-RADS 4 pulmonary nodules ≤2 cm.
Article in Annals of Saudi medicine. 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
backgroundManaging small Lung-RADS 4 pulmonary nodules is clinically challenging. While CT-guided TTFNAB is standard, its efficacy and safety for lesions ≤2 cm require further evaluation to optimize outcomes and reduce unnecessary surgeries.
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, safety, and factors influencing the outcomes of CT-guided TTFNAB in Lung-RADS category 4 pulmonary nodules measuring ≤2 cm.
designRetrospective study.
settingSingle-center, a tertiary referral center. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed on 95 patients who underwent CT-guided TTFNAB between January 2021 and April 2024. Data included demographics, lesion characteristics (size, location, density, and pleural proximity), histopathological findings, and procedural outcomes.
main outcome measuresThe primary endpoints were diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and factors influencing TTFNAB results, alongside procedural complications-specifically pneumothorax and chest tube requirement. SAMPLE SIZE: 95 patients.
resultsOf the 95 nodules, 26 (27%) were benign and 69 (73%) were malignant according to TTFNAB. Final pathology confirmed 18 (19%) benign and 77 (81%) malignant lesions. All biopsies yielded sufficient material. Sensitivity, specificity, and overall diagnostic accuracy were 83%, 94%, and 89%, respectively. The PPV was 98%, while the NPV was 65%. Pleural thickening was significantly more frequent in both the TTFNAB benign group (38% vs. 13%,
conclusionCT-guided TTFNAB is an effective diagnostic method for confirming malignancy in pulmonary nodules ≤2 cm classified as Lung-RADS 4, providing an overall accuracy of 89% and a PPV of 98%. However, a benign TTFNAB result cannot be considered diagnostically safe: the NPV of 65% and false-negative rate of 35% indicate that a negative biopsy does not reliably exclude malignancy. Clinicians must not rely on a negative result alone; close radiological follow-up or surgical biopsy is essential for these high-risk lesions. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective single-center design, small sample size, and limited generalizability. IRB APPROVAL NUMBER: 2024/010.99/6/23 (Date: 26.07.2024).
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.