IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0058016.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Large Needle Aspiration Biopsy Add Pain to the Thyroid Nodule Evaluation?

Author

Listed:
  • Angelo Carpi
  • Giuseppe Rossi
  • Andrea Nicolini
  • Giorgio Iervasi
  • Matteo Russo
  • Jeffrey Mechanick

Abstract

Thyroid large needle aspiration biopsy is disregarded because it is thought to be associated with pain. This is in contrast with our 32 years long experience. We surveyed reports of pain in patients examined with fine needle aspiration biopsy (78, 87.2% women, mean age 59 years) or FNAB+large needle aspiration biopsy (48, 87.5% women, mean age 60 years). Each patient was questioned regarding a) no unpleasant sensation (score “0”); b) unpleasant sensation (“1”); c) mild pain (no analgesic used; “2”); or d) pain (analgesic used; “3”). The mean size of the needle used was for FNAB 22.3±0.7 or 20.8±1 gauge in the fine needle aspiration or fine needle aspiration plus large needle aspiration biopsy group, respectively (p

Suggested Citation

  • Angelo Carpi & Giuseppe Rossi & Andrea Nicolini & Giorgio Iervasi & Matteo Russo & Jeffrey Mechanick, 2013. "Does Large Needle Aspiration Biopsy Add Pain to the Thyroid Nodule Evaluation?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-3, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0058016
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0058016
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0058016&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0058016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0058016. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.