Search

Objectives: To investigate the difference of application of core needle biopsy histology and fine needle aspiration cytology in cervical lymphadenopathy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was made on 80 patients with cervical lymphadenopathy admitted to Baoding No.1 Central Hospital from to October 2018 to February 2020, and they were randomly divided into two groups: core needle group and fine needle group. Patients in the core needle group were given core needle biopsy histology, while those in the fine needle group were given fine needle aspiration cytology, and the puncture results and surgical complications were compared between the two groups. Results: The accuracy rates of the core needle group and the fine needle group in the diagnosis of malignant cervical lymph nodes were 95.83% and 72.22% respectively, with a statistically significant difference (χ²=4.683, p=0.030). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the core needle group were 100.00%, 93.75%, 95.83% and 100.00% respectively, while those of the fine needle group were 86.67%, 90.00%, 86.67% and 90.00% respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the two groups (p>0.05). The complication rate in the core needle group was 22.50%, which was higher than the 5.00% in the fine needle group (χ²=5.165, p=0.023). Conclusions: No significant difference was observed between core needle biopsy histology and fine needle aspiration cytology in diagnosing cervical lymphadenopathy, but the former has a high complication rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare the diagnostic efficacy of fine needle aspiration (FNA) and core needle biopsy (CNB) for metastatic lymph nodes guided by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), and to provide reference for clinical selection of puncture methods. Methods: A total of 168 patients who were admitted to Baoding No.1 Central Hospital from June 2020 to January 2021 and required puncture of the diseased lymph nodes were included. Seventy six patients were guided by conventional ultrasound, of which 37 received FNA and 39 received CNB. 92 patients were guided by CEUS, of which 41 received FNA and 51 received CNB. The diagnostic accuracy of FNA and CNB guided by conventional ultrasound and CEUS was compared, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of FNA and CNB in the diagnosis of metastatic lymph nodes guided by CEUS were further compared. Results: The diagnostic accuracy of FNA and CNB guided by CEUS were higher than that guided by conventional ultrasound, with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of FNA and CNB in the diagnosis of metastatic lymph nodes were 95.0%, 95.2%, 95.0%, 95.2%, 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, respectively, with statistically significant differences (P>0.05). Conclusion: CEUS can guide puncture and improve diagnosis accuracy. No statistical difference can be seen in the diagnostic efficacy of CNB and FNA for metastatic lymph nodes, CNB can provide more diagnostic information, while FNA can replace CNB for metastatic lymph nodes adjacent to blood vessels and difficult to operate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]