ArticleJournal of pathology and translational medicine2026
Diagnostic performance of fine needle aspiration cytology in the preoperative identification of mucoepidermoid carcinoma: a cross-sectional diagnostic analytical study.
Article in Journal of pathology and translational medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC), the most common malignant tumor of the salivary gland, accounts for 5%-10% of all salivary gland tumors. MEC shows extensive cytomorphological diversity, making preoperative diagnosis challenging. Hence, the present study was conducted to assess the diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in diagnosing MEC preoperatively and to discuss the cytological pitfalls in diagnosing mucoepidermoid carcinoma.
methodsThe present study was a cross-sectional diagnostic analytical study conducted over a period of five years, which included confirmed cases of MEC. Each case was classified according to the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) and individual cytomorphological features were noted. All cases were compared by considering histopathology as the gold standard for diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of FNAC in diagnosing MEC were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of FNAC.
resultsAll 42 cases of MEC were reclassified according to MSRSGC as follows: category II, one case; category III, one case; category IVA, two cases; category IVb, one case; category V, four cases; and category VI, 33 cases. Discordant cases (5 cases) were mainly due to cystic change, low cellularity, and overlapping features with benign lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and diagnostic accuracy were found to be 88.1%, 100%, 100%, 97.4%, and 97.8%, respectively.
conclusionsFNAC is an important preoperative diagnostic investigation for MEC as reflected by its high specificity, sensitivity, and overall diagnostic accuracy in the present study. Careful attention to individual cytomorphological features and clinicoradiological correlation can significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy by directing the clinicians for further 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.