OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and cost of a new frontloading biopsy system, Spirotome® (system 1), in musculoskeletal lesions, and to compare the results with those obtained with commonly used biopsy devices. METHODS: System 1 was used in all soft tissue lesions (STL) and osteolytic bone lesions (OBL) of patients who presented at our department for CT-guided biopsy between January 2009 and June 2010. Accuracy and cost were compared to those of Bonopty® (system 2) and Tru-cut (system 3) procedures. RESULTS: The efficacy of system 1 was 85% in STL and 89% in OBL. The procedure was well tolerated and caused no complications. System 3 had an efficacy of 84% in STL and OBL combined. The efficacy of system 2 in OBL was 85%. The cost of single-use system 1 and system 2 was comparable, the cost of system 3 and multiuse system 1 compared to single-use system 1 was 25 and 7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of system 1 in biopsy of STL and OBL was better than that of system 3. In OBL, the efficacy of system 1 was better than that of system 2. In STL at hazardous locations and small OBL with a thin cortical shell, system 1 offers the advantage of variable length and controlled loading. In these cases, single-use system 1 was cost-effective when compared to surgical biopsy. The cost per procedure of multiuse system 1 was lower than of system 3.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and cost of a new frontloading biopsy system, Spirotome® (system 1), in musculoskeletal lesions, and to compare the results with those obtained with commonly used biopsy devices. METHODS: System 1 was used in all soft tissue lesions (STL) and osteolytic bone lesions (OBL) of patients who presented at our department for CT-guided biopsy between January 2009 and June 2010. Accuracy and cost were compared to those of Bonopty® (system 2) and Tru-cut (system 3) procedures. RESULTS: The efficacy of system 1 was 85% in STL and 89% in OBL. The procedure was well tolerated and caused no complications. System 3 had an efficacy of 84% in STL and OBL combined. The efficacy of system 2 in OBL was 85%. The cost of single-use system 1 and system 2 was comparable, the cost of system 3 and multiuse system 1 compared to single-use system 1 was 25 and 7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of system 1 in biopsy of STL and OBL was better than that of system 3. In OBL, the efficacy of system 1 was better than that of system 2. In STL at hazardous locations and small OBL with a thin cortical shell, system 1 offers the advantage of variable length and controlled loading. In these cases, single-use system 1 was cost-effective when compared to surgical biopsy. The cost per procedure of multiuse system 1 was lower than of system 3.
Authors: Eric Lis; Mark H Bilsky; Leszek Pisinski; Patrick Boland; John H Healey; Bernie O'malley; George Krol Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: R Agid; M Sklair-Levy; A I Bloom; S Lieberman; A Polliack; D Ben-Yehuda; Y Sherman; E Libson Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: James S Jelinek; Mark D Murphey; James A Welker; Robert M Henshaw; Mark J Kransdorf; Barry M Shmookler; Martin M Malawer Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ann Cornelis; Marcel Verjans; Thierry Van den Bosch; Katrien Wouters; Johan Van Robaeys; Jaak Ph Janssens Journal: Eur J Cancer Prev Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 2.497