INTRODUCTION:Fine needle aspiration (FNA) has been adopted as a simple and cost effective technique for cytologic studies of thyroid nodules. The recently introduced fine needle nonaspiration (FNNA) technique, however, is claimed to be superior because it provides specimens with larger number of cells and better preserved cytomorphology and architecture of thyroid papillae and follicles. In this study, we compare the efficacy of the two methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients with thyroid nodules, 1-4 cm in size, were recruited. FNA and FNNA techniques were applied to each patient. In a single-blind setting, all specimens were examined by a single cytopathologist. The specimens were scored (0, 1, or 2) on the basis of background blood or clot, number of obtained cells, preserved architecture of papillae and follicles, and cellular degeneration. Nonparametric methods were then used to compare the scores of the two techniques. RESULTS:Two hundred patients (162 female, 38 male) were entered into the study. Specimens from 43 patients were inadequate. In the remaining 157 patients, no statistically significant difference was seen between FNNA and FNA average scores in each parameter (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: We concluded that FNNA is not superior to FNA in the cytopathologic studies of thyroid nodules.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Fine needle aspiration (FNA) has been adopted as a simple and cost effective technique for cytologic studies of thyroid nodules. The recently introduced fine needle nonaspiration (FNNA) technique, however, is claimed to be superior because it provides specimens with larger number of cells and better preserved cytomorphology and architecture of thyroid papillae and follicles. In this study, we compare the efficacy of the two methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients with thyroid nodules, 1-4 cm in size, were recruited. FNA and FNNA techniques were applied to each patient. In a single-blind setting, all specimens were examined by a single cytopathologist. The specimens were scored (0, 1, or 2) on the basis of background blood or clot, number of obtained cells, preserved architecture of papillae and follicles, and cellular degeneration. Nonparametric methods were then used to compare the scores of the two techniques. RESULTS: Two hundred patients (162 female, 38 male) were entered into the study. Specimens from 43 patients were inadequate. In the remaining 157 patients, no statistically significant difference was seen between FNNA and FNA average scores in each parameter (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: We concluded that FNNA is not superior to FNA in the cytopathologic studies of thyroid nodules.
Authors: M Deandrea; G Gallone; M Veglio; A Balsamo; A Grassi; S Sapelli; C Rossi; P G Nasi; V Porcellana; G Varvello; L Capussotti; S Taraglio; N Ravarino; B Torchio; D Fonzo Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Luke J Haseler; Randy R Sibbitt; Wilmer L Sibbitt; Adrian A Michael; Charles M Gasparovic; Arthur D Bankhurst Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2010-11-06 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Randy R Sibbitt; Dennis J Palmer; Wilmer L Sibbitt; Arthur D Bankhurst Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2010-11-06 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Leo F Tauro; Geover J Lobo; Hilda Fernandes; Celine George; P Sathyamoorthy Aithala; Divakar Shenoy; Prathvi Shetty Journal: Oman Med J Date: 2012-03