...
首页> 外文期刊>Head and neck: Journal for the sciences and specialities of the head and neck >Fine‐needle aspiration cytology versus core‐needle biopsy for the diagnosis of extracranial head and neck schwannoma
【24h】

Fine‐needle aspiration cytology versus core‐needle biopsy for the diagnosis of extracranial head and neck schwannoma

机译:细针穿刺细胞学与核心针活检的诊断颅脑头和颈部施瓦膜

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Abstract Background We aimed to investigate the feasibility of diagnosing head and neck schwannomas using core‐needle biopsy (CNB), and to compare this technique to fine‐needle aspiration cytology (FNAC). Methods We designed a prospective case series in which 52 FNAC and 29 CNB samples from 48 patients with head and neck schwannoma were analyzed. Patient demographics, pathological results, and complications were also evaluated. Results Of the 81 total specimens, 24/52 (46.2%) of the FNAC and 0/29 (0.0%) of the CNB samples were unsatisfactory ( P ??.001). Specific diagnoses of schwannoma, including “suspicious schwannoma” and “consistent with schwannoma,” were obtained from 10/52 (19.2%) of the FNAC samples and 28/29 (96.6%) of the CNB samples ( P ??.001). Major complications such as hematoma or permanent nerve injury did not occur in patients who underwent either method. Conclusions CNB can diagnose schwannomas with a higher accuracy than FNAC without increasing the rate of complications.
机译:抽象背景我们旨在使用核心针活检(CNB)来探讨诊断头部和颈部Schwannomas的可行性,并将这种技术与细针抽吸细胞学(FNAC)进行比较。方法设计了一个潜在案例系列,其中分析了来自48例头部和颈部施瓦脉患者的52个FNAC和29个CNB样品。还评估了患者人口统计学,病理结果和并发症。 81总标本的结果,24/52%(46.2%)的FNAC和0/29(0.0%)的CNB样品是不令人满意的(p?& 001)。施瓦马瘤的特异性诊断,包括“可疑施瓦马瘤”和“与施瓦马瘤一致”,从10/52(19.2%)的FNAC样品和28/29(96.6%)的CNB样品中获得(P 1 2×α. 001)。在接受任何一种方法的患者中,没有发生血肿或永久性神经损伤等主要并发症。结论CNB可以诊断施瓦莫玛,比FNAC更高,而不会增加并发症的速度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号