Head & neck · 2020
Comparison of core needle biopsy and fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of ma lignant salivary gland neoplasm: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cho Jungheum, Kim Junghoon, Lee Ji Sung, Chee Choong Guen, Kim Youngjune, Choi Sang Il
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In this meta-analysis, we compared the risk of obtaining nondiagnostic results and the diagnostic accuracy for detection of salivary gland malignancy between core needle biopsy (CNB) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA).
METHODS: All published English-language studies comparing CNB and FNA diagnostic accuracy for salivary gland masses through December 2019 were searched. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) of nondiagnostic results, sensitivities, and specificities of CNB and FNA for salivary gland malignancy diagnosis were determined. Complication rates were compared.
RESULTS: Six studies (1924 procedures) were quantitatively analyzed. CNB yielded significantly fewer nondiagnostic results (P < .001) and had significantly higher pooled sensitivity (P < .001) and specificity (P = .002) than FNA for differentiating malignant and benign salivary gland neoplasms. Hematoma occurred in 0.3% of CNB, while no complication occurred in FNA procedures.
CONCLUSION: CNB yielded fewer nondiagnostic results and had superior diagnostic performance compared with FNA for detecting salivary gland malignancies.
METHODS: All published English-language studies comparing CNB and FNA diagnostic accuracy for salivary gland masses through December 2019 were searched. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) of nondiagnostic results, sensitivities, and specificities of CNB and FNA for salivary gland malignancy diagnosis were determined. Complication rates were compared.
RESULTS: Six studies (1924 procedures) were quantitatively analyzed. CNB yielded significantly fewer nondiagnostic results (P < .001) and had significantly higher pooled sensitivity (P < .001) and specificity (P = .002) than FNA for differentiating malignant and benign salivary gland neoplasms. Hematoma occurred in 0.3% of CNB, while no complication occurred in FNA procedures.
CONCLUSION: CNB yielded fewer nondiagnostic results and had superior diagnostic performance compared with FNA for detecting salivary gland malignancies.