Zenker's Diverticulum Suspected to be a Thyroid Nodule Diagnosed on Fine Needle Aspiration: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zenker’s diverticulum is mimicking thyroid nodule on ultrasonograhy (US). Therefore, it has risk of fine needle aspiration (FNA) on that lesion. There are only four case reports in the literature of fine needle aspiration of Zenker’s diverticula masquerading as a thyroid nodule. We report a case of Zenker's dverticulitum suspected to be a thyroid nodule on US and performed US-guided FNA with examination of cytology in this patient. A 53-yr-old woman was referred to our center for FNA of a thyroid nodule. The thyroid US demonstrated a 1.3 × 1.6 cm, poorly-defined nodule containing multiple echogenic foci in the posterior medial aspect of the left thyroid. We performed US-guided FNA on that lesion. Papanicolaou stain showed squamous epithelial cells and numerous bacilli. We diagnosed this patient as having a Zenker’s diverticulum, and this was confirmed by esophagram. doi:10.4021/jmc635e
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".