BACKGROUND: Percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy in children has been slower to gain acceptance than in adults where it is regarded as the standard clinical practice in screening suspicious masses. OBJECTIVES: To report our experience with percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy in the pediatric population and assess its clinical use, efficacy and limitations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-nine percutaneous image-guided needle biopsies were performed in 57 children. The age of the children ranged from 4 days to 14 years (mean 5.6 years). We used 16- to-20-gauge cutting-edge needles. Sixty-two biopsies were core-needle biopsies and 7 fine-needle aspiration biopsies. RESULTS: There were 50 malignant lesions, 10 benign lesions and 2 infectious lesions. In 55 (88.7 %) lesions the needle biopsy was diagnostic. In 7 (11.3 %) the biopsy was non-diagnostic and the diagnosis was made by surgery. Core-needle biopsy was diagnostic in 47 of 50 (94 %) of the malignant solid tumors. In 3 out of 5 children with lymphoma, an accurate diagnosis was obtained with needle aspiration. Seven children underwent a repeated core-needle biopsy, (5 for Wilms' tumor and 2 for neuroblastoma) that was diagnostic in all cases. All the biopsies were performed without complications. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy is a simple, minimally invasive, safe and accurate method for the evaluation of children with suspicious masses. These data suggest that image-guided needle biopsy is an excellent tool for diagnosing solid tumors in the pediatric population. Negative studies should be considered nondiagnostic and followed by excisional surgical biopsies when clinical suspicion of malignancy is high.
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy in children has been slower to gain acceptance than in adults where it is regarded as the standard clinical practice in screening suspicious masses. OBJECTIVES: To report our experience with percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy in the pediatric population and assess its clinical use, efficacy and limitations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-nine percutaneous image-guided needle biopsies were performed in 57 children. The age of the children ranged from 4 days to 14 years (mean 5.6 years). We used 16- to-20-gauge cutting-edge needles. Sixty-two biopsies were core-needle biopsies and 7 fine-needle aspiration biopsies. RESULTS: There were 50 malignant lesions, 10 benign lesions and 2 infectious lesions. In 55 (88.7 %) lesions the needle biopsy was diagnostic. In 7 (11.3 %) the biopsy was non-diagnostic and the diagnosis was made by surgery. Core-needle biopsy was diagnostic in 47 of 50 (94 %) of the malignant solid tumors. In 3 out of 5 children with lymphoma, an accurate diagnosis was obtained with needle aspiration. Seven children underwent a repeated core-needle biopsy, (5 for Wilms' tumor and 2 for neuroblastoma) that was diagnostic in all cases. All the biopsies were performed without complications. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy is a simple, minimally invasive, safe and accurate method for the evaluation of children with suspicious masses. These data suggest that image-guided needle biopsy is an excellent tool for diagnosing solid tumors in the pediatric population. Negative studies should be considered nondiagnostic and followed by excisional surgical biopsies when clinical suspicion of malignancy is high.
Authors: Christoph M Heyer; Stefan P Lemburg; Thomas Kagel; Klaus-Michael Mueller; Thomas G Nuesslein; Christian H L Rieger; Volkmar Nicolas Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-01-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Terrence Metz; Amer Heider; Ranjith Vellody; Marcus D Jarboe; Joseph J Gemmete; Jason J Grove; Ethan A Smith; Rajen Mody; Erika A Newman; Jonathan R Dillman Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2016-02-25
Authors: Rodrigo B Interiano; Amos H P Loh; Nathan Hinkle; Fazal N Wahid; Alpin D Malkan; Armita Bahrami; Jesse J Jenkins; Shenghua Mao; Jianrong Wu; Kimberly Proctor; Victor M Santana; Alberto S Pappo; Robert E Gold; Andrew M Davidoff Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S Zangos; K Eichler; A Wetter; T Lehnert; R Hammerstingl; T Diebold; P Reichel; C Herzog; M-L Hansmann; M G Mack; T J Vogl Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-07-30 Impact factor: 5.315