ArticleCureus2026
Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology Versus Fine-Needle Non-aspiration Cytology in Thyroid Lesions: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
Background Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and fine-needle non-aspiration cytology (FNNAC) are commonly used techniques for the evaluation of thyroid lesions. Differences in smear quality, cellular preservation, and diagnostic performance between these methods remain a subject of interest. Our study compared FNAC and FNNAC in thyroid lesions using histopathological examination as the reference standard. Methodology A cross-sectional observational study was conducted among 110 patients with clinically palpable thyroid swellings, of whom 75 patients who underwent thyroid surgery with available histopathological examination were included in the final analysis. Both FNAC and FNNAC were performed on the same lesion during the same sitting. Smears were assessed for adequacy, cellular preservation, and diagnostic categorization using the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology. Histopathological examination served as the reference standard for cytohistological correlation and assessment of diagnostic performance. Results The mean age of participants was 42.88 ± 13.59 years. Superior smear quality was observed in 55 (73.3%) FNAC samples and 59 (78.7%) FNNAC samples. Bethesda Category II lesions constituted the majority of cases with both techniques. FNNAC reduced the proportion of indeterminate lesions and identified a higher proportion of malignant lesions. Histopathology revealed 53 (70.7%) benign and 22 (29.3%) malignant lesions. FNNAC demonstrated a stronger correlation with histopathological diagnosis and showed better preservation of cellular architecture with less blood contamination. Diagnostic accuracy was numerically higher with FNNAC (63, 84.0%) than with FNAC (58, 77.3%), with corresponding sensitivities of 11 (50.0%) and 9 (40.9%), respectively; however, the difference in diagnostic accuracy was not statistically significant (McNemar's test, p = 0.228). Conclusions Both FNAC and FNNAC are effective techniques for the cytological evaluation of thyroid lesions. FNNAC demonstrated higher smear quality, improved cellular preservation, higher specificity, and numerically higher overall diagnostic accuracy than FNAC. Although the difference in diagnostic accuracy was not statistically significant, FNNAC may serve as a valuable alternative or complementary technique for improving smear quality in thyroid cytology.
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.