Rajamanickam Senthil K, Prades Morera Eduardo, Agarwal Anurag, Senthilkumar Shruti, Elsaid Nora, Zeitoun Hisham
Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Bangor, GBR.
General Surgery, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Bangor, GBR.
Cureus. 2025 Apr 23;17(4):e82830. doi: 10.7759/cureus.82830. eCollection 2025 Apr.
Background Fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is widely used to evaluate head and neck masses, with both ultrasound (US)-guided and freehand techniques being employed. While US-guided FNAC is thought to enhance accuracy, freehand FNAC remains commonly used due to its practicality and speed. This study compares the diagnostic performance of US-guided and freehand FNAC, evaluating their sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, inconclusive rates, and time to histological confirmation. Aim of the study The aim of this study is to compare the inconclusive rates and time to histological confirmation of US-guided versus freehand FNAC in assessing non-salivary, non-thyroidal head, and neck masses. Methods A retrospective analysis of 439 FNAC reports (2012-2016) was conducted. Diagnostic metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, inconclusive rates, and median time to histological confirmation, were analyzed. Results Among 439 FNAC procedures, 294 were US-guided and 145 were freehand. US-guided FNAC had a lower inconclusive rate (11.6% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.068) and higher specificity (61% vs. 38%), while sensitivity was comparable (91% vs. 95%). Accuracy was 81.6% for US-guided FNAC and 86.3% for freehand FNAC. Freehand FNAC had a shorter median reporting time (29 vs. 42 days). Conclusions Both techniques demonstrated similar diagnostic accuracy. While US-guided FNAC reduced inconclusive rates and improved specificity, freehand FNAC provided faster results, aiding quicker clinical decision-making. These findings suggest that both techniques have distinct benefits, and their use should be tailored to individual patient needs and clinical settings.
细针穿刺细胞学检查(FNAC)广泛用于评估头颈部肿块,采用超声(US)引导和徒手操作技术。虽然认为超声引导下的FNAC可提高准确性,但徒手FNAC因其实用性和速度仍被普遍使用。本研究比较了超声引导和徒手FNAC的诊断性能,评估了它们的敏感性、特异性、准确性、不确定率以及组织学确诊时间。
本研究的目的是比较超声引导与徒手FNAC在评估非唾液腺、非甲状腺的头颈部肿块时的不确定率和组织学确诊时间。
对439份FNAC报告(2012 - 2016年)进行回顾性分析。分析诊断指标,包括敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)、准确性、不确定率以及组织学确诊的中位时间。
在439例FNAC操作中,294例为超声引导下操作,145例为徒手操作。超声引导下的FNAC不确定率较低(11.6%对17.9%;p = 0.068)且特异性较高(61%对38%),而敏感性相当(91%对95%)。超声引导下FNAC的准确性为81.6%,徒手FNAC的准确性为86.3%。徒手FNAC的中位报告时间较短(29天对42天)。
两种技术显示出相似的诊断准确性。虽然超声引导下的FNAC降低了不确定率并提高了特异性,但徒手FNAC提供了更快的结果,有助于更快地进行临床决策。这些发现表明两种技术都有明显的优势,其使用应根据个体患者的需求和临床情况进行调整。