We have located links that may give you full text access.
Factors Influencing the Outcome of Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Salivary Gland Lesion Diagnosis.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess multiple factors influencing the outcomes of ultrasound (US)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of salivary gland lesions.
METHODS: From 2008 to 2013, a single radiologist performed US-guided FNA of salivary gland lesions in 243 patients. With the exclusion of pure cysts, poor image quality, and insufficient static image cases, 218 salivary gland lesions in 218 patients were included. The composition, size, location, and vascularity of the lesions were retrospectively investigated on the basis of sonographic findings by the same radiologist. The relationship between sampling adequacy and multiple factors was compared, and the diagnostic accuracy of US-guided FNA of salivary gland lesions was calculated by using the final diagnosis as a reference standard.
RESULTS: The sampling adequacy rate for US-guided FNA of the 218 salivary gland lesions was 96.8% (211 of 218). A significant difference was observed in the composition and vascularity of the lesions (P < .0001), whereas there was no significant difference in the patient age and sex, lesion size, lesion location, and needle size. The rate of inadequate sampling increased in predominantly cystic lesions compared with solid lesions as well as in low-vascularity lesions compared with high-vascularity lesions. Of the 218 lesions, 178 (81.7%) were ultimately diagnosed, and most were benign (162 of 178 [91.0%]). When 3 cases with indeterminate cytologic results were excluded, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US-guided FNA of salivary gland lesions were 64.3%, 98.8%, 81.8%, 97.0%, and 96.0%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: When using US-guided FNA to diagnose salivary gland lesions, sampling adequacy depends on the composition or vascularity of the lesions.
METHODS: From 2008 to 2013, a single radiologist performed US-guided FNA of salivary gland lesions in 243 patients. With the exclusion of pure cysts, poor image quality, and insufficient static image cases, 218 salivary gland lesions in 218 patients were included. The composition, size, location, and vascularity of the lesions were retrospectively investigated on the basis of sonographic findings by the same radiologist. The relationship between sampling adequacy and multiple factors was compared, and the diagnostic accuracy of US-guided FNA of salivary gland lesions was calculated by using the final diagnosis as a reference standard.
RESULTS: The sampling adequacy rate for US-guided FNA of the 218 salivary gland lesions was 96.8% (211 of 218). A significant difference was observed in the composition and vascularity of the lesions (P < .0001), whereas there was no significant difference in the patient age and sex, lesion size, lesion location, and needle size. The rate of inadequate sampling increased in predominantly cystic lesions compared with solid lesions as well as in low-vascularity lesions compared with high-vascularity lesions. Of the 218 lesions, 178 (81.7%) were ultimately diagnosed, and most were benign (162 of 178 [91.0%]). When 3 cases with indeterminate cytologic results were excluded, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US-guided FNA of salivary gland lesions were 64.3%, 98.8%, 81.8%, 97.0%, and 96.0%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: When using US-guided FNA to diagnose salivary gland lesions, sampling adequacy depends on the composition or vascularity of the lesions.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app