ArticleAmerican journal of clinical pathology2026
Additive diagnostic value of liquid‑based preparation and conventional smears in Bethesda I thyroid nodules.
Article in American journal of clinical pathology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFine-needle aspiration (FNA) is crucial for evaluating thyroid nodules, traditionally using conventional smears (CSs). Recently, liquid-based preparations (LBPs) have gained popularity. This study compared CS and LBP accuracy, combined and separately, in reducing nondiagnostic (Bethesda I) results and identified predictors associated with Bethesda I for both methods combined and separately.
methodsA prospective comparison of thyroid FNA results in early 2024, using LBP alone vs LBP combined with CSs, was conducted. Retrospective data were collected from 2087 patients who underwent cytologic evaluation between 2020 and 2023, using CS alone and LBP combined with CSs. The study compared nondiagnostic results between the methods and adjusted for significant predictors.
resultsIn a prospective analysis of 218 LBP samples, combining CSs improved diagnosis in 15 cases (7%), allowing diagnosis in 12 and upgrading the result in 3 cases compared with LBP alone. In the retrospective analysis (CS, 1126 samples; LBP and CS, 961 samples), nondiagnostic results occurred in 14.2% and 18.2% of the cases, respectively (P = .793). Higher nondiagnostic results were significantly associated with older age, comorbidities, and pure cysts (P = .001) for both methods. For CS only, significant associations were found with abnormal thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) levels (P = .050), macrocalcifications (P = .045), and heterogeneous cysts (P = .038).
conclusionsWe did not demonstrate an additive effect for the LBP method. However, it may still be preferable in nodules with abnormal TSH levels, heterogeneous cystic features, or macrocalcifications. The prospective findings indicate a clinical advantage for CS analysis. Accordingly, we recommend performing aspiration for both techniques, using CS only if a nondiagnostic result is obtained for LBP.
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.