TY - JOUR
T1 - Cytopathologic criteria and size should be considered in comparison of fine-needle aspiration vs. core-needle biopsy for thyroid nodules
T2 - results based on large surgical series
AU - Yoon, Jung Hyun
AU - Lee, Hye Sun
AU - Kim, Eun Kyung
AU - Moon, Hee Jung
AU - Park, Vivian Youngjean
AU - Kwak, Jin Young
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2020/12
Y1 - 2020/12
N2 - Purpose: To evaluate and compared the diagnostic performances of FNA and CNB using various cytopathologic criteria and size subgroups to see how the comparison results differ accordingly. Methods: From May 2012 to May 2019, 8187 thyroid nodules in 8139 patients who had undergone preoperative US-guided FNA or CNB at outside clinics were included in this retrospective study (mean size: 11.9 ± 9.5 mm). Preoperative US-FNA was performed in 7496 (91.6%) nodules and US-CNB was performed in 691 (8.4%) nodules. Propensity score matching was used to compare the sensitivities between FNA and CNB in diagnosis of malignancy and neoplasm according to different cytologic test criteria. Results: Of the 8187 thyroid nodules, 7833 (95.7%) were malignant and 354 (4.3%) were benign. Mean size of the thyroid nodules in the CNB group was significantly larger than the FNA group, 15.7 ± 12.7 mm vs. 11.6 ± 9.0 mm, respectively (P < 0.001). After matching, sensitivity in the CNB group were significantly higher in the total population, and in subgroups <10 mm for criteria 1 and 2 (all P < 0.05, respectively). No significant differences were seen between the sensitivities of FNA and CNB for nodules ≥10 mm regardless of criteria in diagnosis of malignancy or neoplasm (all P > 0.05, respectively). Conclusions: Results comparing sensitivities between FNA and CNB differ according to the different cytopathologic criteria used for calculation. CNB has significantly higher sensitivity to FNA in subcentimeter nodules when using criteria 1 or 2. Diagnostic sensitivities did not show significant differences for nodules ≥10 mm regardless of the cytopathologic criteria used, that should be considered in selecting biopsy methods.
AB - Purpose: To evaluate and compared the diagnostic performances of FNA and CNB using various cytopathologic criteria and size subgroups to see how the comparison results differ accordingly. Methods: From May 2012 to May 2019, 8187 thyroid nodules in 8139 patients who had undergone preoperative US-guided FNA or CNB at outside clinics were included in this retrospective study (mean size: 11.9 ± 9.5 mm). Preoperative US-FNA was performed in 7496 (91.6%) nodules and US-CNB was performed in 691 (8.4%) nodules. Propensity score matching was used to compare the sensitivities between FNA and CNB in diagnosis of malignancy and neoplasm according to different cytologic test criteria. Results: Of the 8187 thyroid nodules, 7833 (95.7%) were malignant and 354 (4.3%) were benign. Mean size of the thyroid nodules in the CNB group was significantly larger than the FNA group, 15.7 ± 12.7 mm vs. 11.6 ± 9.0 mm, respectively (P < 0.001). After matching, sensitivity in the CNB group were significantly higher in the total population, and in subgroups <10 mm for criteria 1 and 2 (all P < 0.05, respectively). No significant differences were seen between the sensitivities of FNA and CNB for nodules ≥10 mm regardless of criteria in diagnosis of malignancy or neoplasm (all P > 0.05, respectively). Conclusions: Results comparing sensitivities between FNA and CNB differ according to the different cytopathologic criteria used for calculation. CNB has significantly higher sensitivity to FNA in subcentimeter nodules when using criteria 1 or 2. Diagnostic sensitivities did not show significant differences for nodules ≥10 mm regardless of the cytopathologic criteria used, that should be considered in selecting biopsy methods.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087802925&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85087802925&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s12020-020-02416-z
DO - 10.1007/s12020-020-02416-z
M3 - Article
C2 - 32656693
AN - SCOPUS:85087802925
SN - 0969-711X
VL - 70
SP - 558
EP - 565
JO - Endocrine
JF - Endocrine
IS - 3
ER -