Abstract
Purpose
To compare the accuracy and complication rate of two different CT-guided transthoracic needle biopsy techniques: fine needle aspiration and an automated biopsy device.Methods
Two consecutive series of respectively 125 (group A) and 98 (group B) biopsies performed using 20-22 gauge coaxial fine needle aspiration (group A) and an automated 19.5 gauge coaxial biopsy device (group B) were compared in terms of their accuracy and complication rate.Results
Groups A and B included respectively 100 (80%) and 77 (79%) malignant lesions and 25 (20%) and 18 (21%) benign lesions. No significant difference was found between the two series concerning patients, lesions, and procedural variables. For a diagnosis of malignancy, a statistically significant difference in sensitivity was found (82.7% vs 97.4%) between results obtained with the automated biopsy device and fine needle aspiration respectively. For a diagnosis of malignancy, the false negative rate of the biopsy result was significantly higher (p <0.005) in group A (17%) than in group B (2.6%). For a specific diagnosis of benignity, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups (44% vs 26%) but the automated biopsy device provided fewer indeterminate cases. There was no difference between the two groups concerning the pneumothorax rate, which was 20% in group A and 15% in group B, or the hemoptysis rate, which was 2.4% in group A and 4% in group B.Conclusion
For a diagnosis of malignancy when a cytopathologist is not available on-site, automated biopsy devices provide a lower rate of false negative results and a similar complication rate to fine needle aspiration.Citations & impact
Impact metrics
Citations of article over time
Smart citations by scite.ai
Explore citation contexts and check if this article has been
supported or disputed.
https://scite.ai/reports/10.1007/s002700010067
Article citations
Computed-Tomography-Guided Lung Biopsy: A Practice-Oriented Document on Techniques and Principles and a Review of the Literature.
Diagnostics (Basel), 14(11):1089, 24 May 2024
Cited by: 0 articles | PMID: 38893616 | PMCID: PMC11171640
Review Free full text in Europe PMC
Endoscopic Technologies for Peripheral Pulmonary Lesions: From Diagnosis to Therapy.
Life (Basel), 13(2):254, 17 Jan 2023
Cited by: 6 articles | PMID: 36836612 | PMCID: PMC9959751
Review Free full text in Europe PMC
Diagnostic accuracy and safety of CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy with a coaxial cutting needle for the diagnosis of lung cancer in patients with UIP pattern.
Sci Rep, 12(1):15682, 20 Sep 2022
Cited by: 2 articles | PMID: 36127437 | PMCID: PMC9489867
Patient and Procedure-related Characteristics Correlated with Severity of Hemoptysis Following Percutaneous Transthoracic Needle Biopsy: Results of a 10-year Retrospective Review.
J Radiol Nurs, 41(2):82-88, 05 Apr 2022
Cited by: 1 article | PMID: 37799819 | PMCID: PMC10552674
Three-dimensionally printed navigational template: a promising guiding approach for lung biopsy.
Transl Lung Cancer Res, 11(3):393-403, 01 Mar 2022
Cited by: 3 articles | PMID: 35399565 | PMCID: PMC8988075
Go to all (94) article citations
Similar Articles
To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.
CT-guided transthoracic needle biopsy of pulmonary nodules smaller than 20 mm: results with an automated 20-gauge coaxial cutting needle.
Clin Radiol, 55(4):281-287, 01 Apr 2000
Cited by: 105 articles | PMID: 10767187
Transthoracic needle biopsy with a coaxially placed 20-gauge automated cutting needle: results in 122 patients.
Radiology, 198(3):715-720, 01 Mar 1996
Cited by: 167 articles | PMID: 8628859
CT-guided transthoracic needle aspiration biopsy of pulmonary nodules: needle size and pneumothorax rate.
Radiology, 229(2):475-481, 01 Nov 2003
Cited by: 231 articles | PMID: 14595149
Comparison of accuracy and safety of computed tomography guided and unguided transthoracic fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosis of lung lesions.
J Assoc Physicians India, 49:626-629, 01 Jun 2001
Cited by: 3 articles | PMID: 11584938
Review