Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography in Diagnosis of Parotid Gland Lesions Using Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology as The Gold Standard

Le résumé fourni par la source

Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound by using ultrasound-guided FNAC as the gold standard for diagnosing parotid salivary gland conditions. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at the Radiology department of Islamabad Diagnostic Centre from January 2022 to December 2022. Patients of all ages and genders with suspected major salivary gland conditions were included. All patients underwent ultrasonography and FNAC after providing informed consent and receiving an explanation of the procedure. Following local anesthesia, a needle was inserted under ultrasound guidance to aspirate tissue samples. The aspirated material was labeled, handled, and transported for laboratory analysis. Data were collected using a self-designed form, and data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 20. Results: A total of 47 cases were evaluated, with a mean participant age of 47.31 years. Of all participants, 57.4% were males, and 42.6% were females. Among the cases with benign FNAC results, 19 were correctly identified as benign in histopathology (True Positives, TP), while 2 were incorrectly classified as malignant (False Positives, FP). Conversely, for the cases with malignant FNAC results, 6 were falsely identified as benign (False Negatives, FN), and 20 were correctly classified as malignant (True Negatives, TN). Sensitivity was found to be 76%, and specificity was 95%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 90%, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 76%. The overall accuracy of ultrasound-guided FNAC was calculated to be 82%. Conclusion: Ultrasonography has proven to be an effective, non-invasive, and reliable diagnostic tool for assessing parotid gland pathology. It demonstrated a strong capability in accurately distinguishing between benign and malignant cases, with high sensitivity and specificity.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.