PURPOSE: To evaluate percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy in patients suspected of having a malignant biliary obstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty consecutive patients (82 men and 48 women; mean age, 59 years) with obstructive jaundice underwent transluminal forceps biopsy during or after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The lesions involved the common bile duct (n = 58), common hepatic duct (n = 39), hilum (n = 14), ampullary segment of the common bile duct (n = 11), right or left intrahepatic bile duct (n = 5), or the entire extrahepatic bile duct (n = 3). In each patient, three to five specimens (mean, 4.1 specimens) were taken from the lesion with 5.4-F biopsy forceps. The final diagnosis for each patient was confirmed with pathologic findings at surgery, additional histocytologic data, or clinical and radiologic follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed with the chi(2) test; a P value < or =.05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. RESULTS: Ninety-eight of 130 biopsies resulted in correct diagnoses of malignancy. Five biopsy diagnoses proved to be true-negative. There were 27 false-negative diagnoses and no false-positive diagnoses. The diagnostic performance of transluminal forceps biopsy in malignant biliary obstructions was as follows: sensitivity, 78.4%; specificity, 100%; and accuracy, 79.2%. Sensitivity of biopsy in the 82 patients with cholangiocarcinoma was higher than in the 43 patients with malignant tumors other than cholangiocarcinoma (86.6% vs 62.8%, P <.005). Sensitivity was significantly lower in the ampullary segment of the common bile duct than in other sites (P <.01). No major complications related to the biopsy procedures occurred. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy is a safe procedure that is easy to perform through a transhepatic biliary drainage tract. It provides relatively high accuracy in the diagnosis of malignant biliary obstructions. Copyright RSNA, 2002
PURPOSE: To evaluate percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy in patients suspected of having a malignant biliary obstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty consecutive patients (82 men and 48 women; mean age, 59 years) with obstructive jaundice underwent transluminal forceps biopsy during or after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The lesions involved the common bile duct (n = 58), common hepatic duct (n = 39), hilum (n = 14), ampullary segment of the common bile duct (n = 11), right or left intrahepatic bile duct (n = 5), or the entire extrahepatic bile duct (n = 3). In each patient, three to five specimens (mean, 4.1 specimens) were taken from the lesion with 5.4-F biopsy forceps. The final diagnosis for each patient was confirmed with pathologic findings at surgery, additional histocytologic data, or clinical and radiologic follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed with the chi(2) test; a P value < or =.05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. RESULTS: Ninety-eight of 130 biopsies resulted in correct diagnoses of malignancy. Five biopsy diagnoses proved to be true-negative. There were 27 false-negative diagnoses and no false-positive diagnoses. The diagnostic performance of transluminal forceps biopsy in malignant biliary obstructions was as follows: sensitivity, 78.4%; specificity, 100%; and accuracy, 79.2%. Sensitivity of biopsy in the 82 patients with cholangiocarcinoma was higher than in the 43 patients with malignant tumors other than cholangiocarcinoma (86.6% vs 62.8%, P <.005). Sensitivity was significantly lower in the ampullary segment of the common bile duct than in other sites (P <.01). No major complications related to the biopsy procedures occurred. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy is a safe procedure that is easy to perform through a transhepatic biliary drainage tract. It provides relatively high accuracy in the diagnosis of malignant biliary obstructions. Copyright RSNA, 2002
Authors: G Carrafiello; F Fontana; M Mangini; A M Ierardi; E Cotta; F Piacentino; M De Chiara; C Floridi; A Di Massa; A M Marconi; C Fugazzola Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Anne Marie Augustin; Marcus Steingrüber; Friederika Fluck; Oliver Goetze; Thorsten Alexander Bley; Ralph Kickuth Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Aldo Sebastián Oggero; Florencia Di Rocco; Pablo Ezequiel Huespe; Eduardo Mullen; Martín de Santibañes; Rodrigo Sanchez Claria; Oscar María Mazza; Juan Pekolk; Eduardo de Santibañes; Sung Ho Hyon Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Jung Gu Park; Gyoo-Sik Jung; Jong Hyouk Yun; Byung Chul Yun; Sang Uk Lee; Byung Hoon Han; Ji Ho Ko Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: D Goere; G D Wagholikar; P Pessaux; N Carrère; A Sibert; V Vilgrain; A Sauvanet; J Belghiti Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-02-27 Impact factor: 4.584