Cao Houjun, Kao Ruey H, Hsieh Ming-Chieh
a Department of General Surgery , General Hospital of Air Force , Beijing , China ;
b Ootaki Clinic , Taipei , Taiwan ;
Curr Med Res Opin. 2016 Jul;32(7):1291-301. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2016.1170674. Epub 2016 Apr 21.
Core-needle biopsy (C.N.B.) is a procedure that is usually performed after repeated non-diagnostic fine-needle aspiration (F.N.A.) or in combination with F.N.A. in the detection of thyroid malignancy. The purpose of this study was to: (1) compare the accuracy of C.N.B. and F.N.A. in the detection of thyroid malignancy; (2) evaluate the accuracy of C.N.B. in nodules with prior non-diagnostic F.N.A.
Meta-analysis was performed with Comprehensive Meta-Analysis statistical software, version 2.0. A bivariate approach of hierarchical summary R.O.C. was performed using R software. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Publication bias analysis was performed by funnel plot and Egger's test analysis.
The main results of our study are as follows. 1) Overall C.N.B. had fewer non-diagnostic results than F.N.A. (pooled O.R. = 4.93, 95% C.I.: 2.17-11.19). Pooled sensitivities and specificities of C.N.B. and F.N.A. did not differ significantly. (2) There was no significant difference in the rates of non-diagnostic results of first-line F.N.A. and C.N.B. (O.R. = 2.42, 95% C.I. 0.95-6.18). Pooled sensitivities and specificities did not differ significantly. C.N.B. yielded fewer non-diagnostic results compared to repeated F.N.A. (O.R. = 19.13, 95% C.I. 7.08-51.65) for thyroid cancers with prior non-diagnostic F.N.A.
The A.U.C.s of the hierarchical summary R.O.C. (H.S.R.O.C.) were 0.669 for repeated F.N.A. and 0.984 for C.N.B. with separated confidence regions for sensitivity and false positive rate.
C.N.B. has higher diagnostic accuracy than repeat F.N.A. for thyroid nodules with prior non-diagnostic F.N.A.
There is no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of C.N.B. and F.N.A. as first-line diagnostic tools.
粗针活检(C.N.B.)是一种通常在反复进行的非诊断性细针穿刺抽吸活检(F.N.A.)之后进行的操作,或者在检测甲状腺恶性肿瘤时与F.N.A.联合使用。本研究的目的是:(1)比较C.N.B.和F.N.A.在检测甲状腺恶性肿瘤方面的准确性;(2)评估C.N.B.在先前F.N.A.为非诊断性的结节中的准确性。
使用Comprehensive Meta-Analysis统计软件2.0进行荟萃分析。使用R软件进行分层汇总R.O.C.的双变量方法。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估研究质量。通过漏斗图和Egger检验分析进行发表偏倚分析。
我们研究的主要结果如下。1)总体而言,C.N.B.的非诊断性结果比F.N.A.少(合并比值比=4.93,95%置信区间:2.17-11.19)。C.N.B.和F.N.A.的合并敏感性和特异性没有显著差异。(2)一线F.N.A.和C.N.B.的非诊断性结果率没有显著差异(比值比=2.42,95%置信区间0.95-6.18)。合并敏感性和特异性没有显著差异。对于先前F.N.A.为非诊断性的甲状腺癌,与反复F.N.A.相比,C.N.B.产生的非诊断性结果更少(比值比=19.13,95%置信区间7.08-51.65)。
分层汇总R.O.C.(H.S.R.O.C.)的曲线下面积(A.U.C.)对于反复F.N.A.为0.669,对于C.N.B.为0.984,敏感性和假阳性率有单独的置信区间。
对于先前F.N.A.为非诊断性的甲状腺结节,C.N.B.比反复F.N.A.具有更高的诊断准确性。
作为一线诊断工具,C.N.B.和F.N.A.的诊断性能没有显著差异。