OBJECTIVE: When deciding on therapy, FDG PET/CT-positive results should be confirmed by histology if possible. We evaluated the impact of percutaneous PET/CT-guided biopsies on histological confirmation of PET/CT-positive lesions. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 126 patients who had undergone a PET/CT scan with positive results with an indication for histological evaluation of lesions. Imaging was performed in a PET/CT scanner with a fluoroscopic imaging system. A total of 130 lesions were accessed by PET/CT-guided biopsy. The technical feasibility, clinical success and complication rates of PET/CT-guided biopsies were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 130 PET/CT-positive lesions, 128 (98.5 %) were successfully accessed and representative tissue samples obtained. Two lesions were reaccessed due to inconclusive histological results. Histology showed that 99 of the 130 lesions (76.2 %) were malignant, and 31 lesions (23.8 %) were benign (inflammatory cells or necrotic tissue); these patients had no recurrence of disease after a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Also, in 23 of the 130 lesions (17.7 %), the patient was referred for the PET/CT-guided biopsy due to a previous nontumoral biopsy result, and of these 23 lesions, 21 were found to be malignant. The complication rates were: pneumothorax in 15/130 (11.5 %; resolved spontaneously), haemoptysis in 2/130 (1.5 %) and severe haemothorax in 1/130 (0.8 %); there was no procedure-related mortality. CONCLUSION: PET/CT-guided biopsy is feasible and may optimize the diagnostic yield of image-guided interventions. Also, PET/CT-positive lesions with no morphological correlation may now be accessible to percutaneous interventions.
OBJECTIVE: When deciding on therapy, FDG PET/CT-positive results should be confirmed by histology if possible. We evaluated the impact of percutaneous PET/CT-guided biopsies on histological confirmation of PET/CT-positive lesions. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 126 patients who had undergone a PET/CT scan with positive results with an indication for histological evaluation of lesions. Imaging was performed in a PET/CT scanner with a fluoroscopic imaging system. A total of 130 lesions were accessed by PET/CT-guided biopsy. The technical feasibility, clinical success and complication rates of PET/CT-guided biopsies were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 130 PET/CT-positive lesions, 128 (98.5 %) were successfully accessed and representative tissue samples obtained. Two lesions were reaccessed due to inconclusive histological results. Histology showed that 99 of the 130 lesions (76.2 %) were malignant, and 31 lesions (23.8 %) were benign (inflammatory cells or necrotic tissue); these patients had no recurrence of disease after a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Also, in 23 of the 130 lesions (17.7 %), the patient was referred for the PET/CT-guided biopsy due to a previous nontumoral biopsy result, and of these 23 lesions, 21 were found to be malignant. The complication rates were: pneumothorax in 15/130 (11.5 %; resolved spontaneously), haemoptysis in 2/130 (1.5 %) and severe haemothorax in 1/130 (0.8 %); there was no procedure-related mortality. CONCLUSION: PET/CT-guided biopsy is feasible and may optimize the diagnostic yield of image-guided interventions. Also, PET/CT-positive lesions with no morphological correlation may now be accessible to percutaneous interventions.
Authors: Juliano J Cerci; Evelinda Trindade; Valeria Buccheri; Stefano Fanti; Artur M N Coutinho; Lucia Zanoni; Camila C G Linardi; Monica Celli; Dominique Delbeke; Luís F Pracchia; Felipe A Pitela; José Soares; Pier Luigi Zinzani; José C Meneghetti Journal: Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk Date: 2011-08
Authors: Bruce D Cheson; Beate Pfistner; Malik E Juweid; Randy D Gascoyne; Lena Specht; Sandra J Horning; Bertrand Coiffier; Richard I Fisher; Anton Hagenbeek; Emanuele Zucca; Steven T Rosen; Sigrid Stroobants; T Andrew Lister; Richard T Hoppe; Martin Dreyling; Kensei Tobinai; Julie M Vose; Joseph M Connors; Massimo Federico; Volker Diehl Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-01-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Servet Tatli; Victor H Gerbaudo; Christina M Feeley; Paul B Shyn; Kemal Tuncali; Stuart G Silverman Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2011-03-02 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Michelle C Omura; Kambiz Motamedi; Stacy UyBico; Scott D Nelson; Leanne L Seeger Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: S Mahner; S Schirrmacher; W Brenner; L Jenicke; C R Habermann; N Avril; J Dose-Schwarz Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2008-03-19 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Louise M Fanchon; Snjezana Dogan; Andre L Moreira; Sean A Carlin; C Ross Schmidtlein; Ellen Yorke; Aditya P Apte; Irene A Burger; Jeremy C Durack; Joseph P Erinjeri; Majid Maybody; Heiko Schöder; Robert H Siegelbaum; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Joseph O Deasy; Stephen B Solomon; John L Humm; Assen S Kirov Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Assen S Kirov; Louise M Fanchon; Daniel Seiter; Christian Czmielewski; James Russell; Snjezana Dogan; Sean Carlin; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Ellen Yorke; C Ross Schmidtlein; Vitaly Boyko; Sho Fujisawa; Katia Manova-Todorova; Pat Zanzonico; Lawrence Dauer; Joseph O Deasy; John L Humm; Stephen Solomon Journal: Med Phys Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Stephen P Povoski; Nathan C Hall; Douglas A Murrey; Chadwick L Wright; Edward W Martin Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-05-08 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Stephen P Povoski; Douglas A Murrey; Sabrina M Smith; Edward W Martin; Nathan C Hall Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Marcos D Guimaraes; Edson Marchiori; Bruno C Odisio; Bruno Hochhegger; Almir G V Bitencourt; Charles E Zurstrassen; Chiang C Tyng; Jefferson L Gross; Rubens Chojniak; Myrna C B Godoy Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-07-10 Impact factor: 2.754