S Karstrup1, E Balslev, N Juul, P C Eskildsen, L Baumbach. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Roskilde Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Kogevej 7-13, DK-4000, Roskilde, Denmark. rsska@ra.dk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was retrospectively to evaluate ultrasound (US) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA), in combination with US-guided coarse-needle biopsies, (CNB) from solitary or dominant thyroid nodules routinely performed during a 2 year period. METHODS: Seventy seven patients were biopsied using US-guided FNA and CNB. FNA was performed using a 21-Gauge needle and CNB using a 18-Gauge single action spring-activated needle biopsy system. The biopsies were performed with local anaesthesia. The Department of Pathology routinely examined the biopsy specimens. The retrieval rate in obtaining material for diagnostic evaluation was FNA (97%), CNB (88%), FNA and CNB (100%). RESULTS: In all, 41 of the 77 patients underwent neck-surgery. The surgical specimens were used to determine the results of diagnosing neoplasia. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for FNA were 80, 83, and 77%. For CNB 86, 78, and 94%. For both FNA and CNB 80, 89 and 73%. The diagnostic value of the two methods showed no significant difference (P < 0.05). CNB revealed contrary to FNA, however, one additional cancer. Also a higher number of false positive findings was noticed using FNA. No serious complications were registered. Adequate biopsies were obtained in all the patients using the combination of US-guided FNA and CNB. No patient underwent rebiopsy. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that neither US-guided CNB nor the combination of US-guided FNA and CNB were superior to US-guided FNA. US-guided CNB is only recommended in few selected patients.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was retrospectively to evaluate ultrasound (US) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA), in combination with US-guided coarse-needle biopsies, (CNB) from solitary or dominant thyroid nodules routinely performed during a 2 year period. METHODS: Seventy seven patients were biopsied using US-guided FNA and CNB. FNA was performed using a 21-Gauge needle and CNB using a 18-Gauge single action spring-activated needle biopsy system. The biopsies were performed with local anaesthesia. The Department of Pathology routinely examined the biopsy specimens. The retrieval rate in obtaining material for diagnostic evaluation was FNA (97%), CNB (88%), FNA and CNB (100%). RESULTS: In all, 41 of the 77 patients underwent neck-surgery. The surgical specimens were used to determine the results of diagnosing neoplasia. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for FNA were 80, 83, and 77%. For CNB 86, 78, and 94%. For both FNA and CNB 80, 89 and 73%. The diagnostic value of the two methods showed no significant difference (P < 0.05). CNB revealed contrary to FNA, however, one additional cancer. Also a higher number of false positive findings was noticed using FNA. No serious complications were registered. Adequate biopsies were obtained in all the patients using the combination of US-guided FNA and CNB. No patient underwent rebiopsy. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that neither US-guided CNB nor the combination of US-guided FNA and CNB were superior to US-guided FNA. US-guided CNB is only recommended in few selected patients.
Authors: U Yousaf; L H Christensen; A K Rasmussen; F Jensen; C L Mollerup; J Kirkegaard; I Lausen; F Rank; U Feldt-Rasmussen Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2007-11-19 Impact factor: 3.478