A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Computed tomography-guided transthoracic fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of lung cancer: a comparison of single-pass needle and multiple-pass coaxial needle systems and the value of immediate cytological assessment. | LitMetric

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to compare single-pass needle and multiple-pass coaxial needle systems and to evaluate the value of immediate cytological assessment during the procedure in the diagnosis of lung cancer with CT-guided transthoracic fine-needle aspiration.

Methodology: One hundred and forty-three consecutive patients who underwent CT-guided transthoracic fine-needle aspiration were divided into three groups. In the first group (group A, 48 patients), a single-pass needle was used for aspiration, but immediate cytological examination was not performed. In the second group (group B, 48 patients), a single-pass needle was used for aspiration and a pathologist immediately assessed the adequacy of the sample obtained. In the third group (group C, 47 patients), a multiple-pass coaxial needle was used for aspiration and a pathologist immediately assessed the adequacy of the sample obtained.

Results: The mean number of fine-needle aspirations was 1.25 in group A, 1.39 in group B and 1.34 in group C (group A vs group B, P = 0.08). The diagnostic accuracy was 83.3, 97.9 and 100.0%, respectively (group A vs group B, P = 0.03; group B vs group C, P > 0.05). Although immediate cytological assessment resulted in adequate samples being obtained from all patients in groups B and C, adequate samples were obtained in 41 of 48 patients (85.4%) in group A (P = 0.004). There was no statistically significant difference among the groups with respect to the rate of pneumothorax.

Conclusions: A single-pass needle technique in transthoracic fine-needle aspiration is preferred because there is no significant difference between single-pass needle and multiple-pass coaxial needle systems with respect to the diagnostic accuracy and the complication rate and, in addition, the single-pass needle has a lower cost. The results of the present study suggest that immediate cytological assessment during the procedure reduces an inadequate sampling rate, thus increasing the diagnostic accuracy of the procedure.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1843.2004.00607.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

single-pass needle
28
group group
28
transthoracic fine-needle
16
multiple-pass coaxial
16
coaxial needle
16
cytological assessment
16
group
16
fine-needle aspiration
12
needle multiple-pass
12
needle systems
12

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!