Ying-Yueh Chang1, Chun-Ku Chen2,3,4, Yi-Chen Yeh5,6, Mei-Han Wu1,5. 1. Department of Radiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 201, Sec. 2, Shipai Rd., Taipei, 112, Taiwan. 2. Department of Radiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 201, Sec. 2, Shipai Rd., Taipei, 112, Taiwan. ckchen@vghtpe.gov.tw. 3. School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, 155, Sec. 2, Linong St., Taipei, 112, Taiwan. ckchen@vghtpe.gov.tw. 4. Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, 155, Sec. 2, Linong St., Taipei, 112, Taiwan. ckchen@vghtpe.gov.tw. 5. School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, 155, Sec. 2, Linong St., Taipei, 112, Taiwan. 6. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 201, Sec. 2, Shipai Rd., Taipei, 112, Taiwan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study evaluated the diagnostic yield and safety of CT-guided core biopsy of pulmonary nodules ≤8 mm. METHODS: We determined the diagnostic yield and safety profile of CT-guided lung biopsies for 125 pulmonary nodules ≤8 mm. Pathological diagnoses were made by a combination of histopathological examination and imprint cytology. Results were compared with biopsy results for 134 pulmonary nodules >8 and ≤10 mm. RESULTS: Final diagnoses were established in 94 nodules ≤8 mm. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of CT-guided core biopsy for nodules ≤8 mm were 87.1 % (61/70 nodules), 100 % (24/24) and 90.4 % (85/94), respectively. Diagnostic failure rates were comparable for nodules ≤8 mm and nodules >8 mm and ≤10 mm (9/94, 9.6 % and 7/111, 6.3 %, respectively, P=0.385). The rate of tube thoracostomy for nodules ≤8 mm was comparable to that for nodules >8 and ≤10 mm (1.6 % vs. 0.7 %, P=0.611). Nodules ≤6 mm had a higher non-diagnostic result rate of 15.4 % (6/39) than did nodules >8 and ≤10 mm (3.7 %, 5/134, P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: CT-guided pulmonary biopsy is feasible for lung nodules ≤8 mm, especially those >6 mm, and has an acceptable diagnostic yield and safety profile. KEY POINTS: • CT-guided biopsy of lung nodules ≤8 mm has high diagnostic accuracy. • Safety profiles are similar between nodules ≤8 mm and 8-10 mm. • Nodules ≤6 mm have higher rates of non-diagnostic results in biopsy. • Non-subpleural nodules and old age are risk factors for higher grade haemorrhage. • Biopsy is feasible for diagnosing nodules >6 and ≤8 mm.
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study evaluated the diagnostic yield and safety of CT-guided core biopsy of pulmonary nodules ≤8 mm. METHODS: We determined the diagnostic yield and safety profile of CT-guided lung biopsies for 125 pulmonary nodules ≤8 mm. Pathological diagnoses were made by a combination of histopathological examination and imprint cytology. Results were compared with biopsy results for 134 pulmonary nodules >8 and ≤10 mm. RESULTS: Final diagnoses were established in 94 nodules ≤8 mm. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of CT-guided core biopsy for nodules ≤8 mm were 87.1 % (61/70 nodules), 100 % (24/24) and 90.4 % (85/94), respectively. Diagnostic failure rates were comparable for nodules ≤8 mm and nodules >8 mm and ≤10 mm (9/94, 9.6 % and 7/111, 6.3 %, respectively, P=0.385). The rate of tube thoracostomy for nodules ≤8 mm was comparable to that for nodules >8 and ≤10 mm (1.6 % vs. 0.7 %, P=0.611). Nodules ≤6 mm had a higher non-diagnostic result rate of 15.4 % (6/39) than did nodules >8 and ≤10 mm (3.7 %, 5/134, P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: CT-guided pulmonary biopsy is feasible for lung nodules ≤8 mm, especially those >6 mm, and has an acceptable diagnostic yield and safety profile. KEY POINTS: • CT-guided biopsy of lung nodules ≤8 mm has high diagnostic accuracy. • Safety profiles are similar between nodules ≤8 mm and 8-10 mm. • Nodules ≤6 mm have higher rates of non-diagnostic results in biopsy. • Non-subpleural nodules and old age are risk factors for higher grade haemorrhage. • Biopsy is feasible for diagnosing nodules >6 and ≤8 mm.
Authors: Ji Yung Choo; Chang Min Park; Nyoung Keun Lee; Sang Min Lee; Hyun-Ju Lee; Jin Mo Goo Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-09-14 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: J P Ko; J O Shepard; E A Drucker; S L Aquino; A Sharma; B Sabloff; E Halpern; T C McLoud Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ailbhe C O'Neill; Colin McCarthy; Carole A Ridge; Patrick Mitchell; Emer Hanrahan; Marcus Butler; Michael P Keane; Jonathan D Dodd Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jin Woo Choi; Chang Min Park; Jin Mo Goo; Yang-Kyun Park; Wonmo Sung; Hyun-Ju Lee; Sang Min Lee; Ji Young Ko; Mi-Suk Shim Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Emilie Lissavalid; Antoine Khalil; Ghassen Soussi; Marie-Pierre Debray; Alice Guyard; Vincent Bunel; Raphael Borie; Pierre Mordant; Aurélie Cazes; Gérard Zalcman; Valérie Gounant Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2022-01-24
Authors: Xukai Li; Ke Xu; Renli Cen; Jinghui Deng; Zhexue Hao; Jun Liu; Hiromitsu Takizawa; Calvin S H Ng; Giuseppe Marulli; Min P Kim; Fei Cui; Jianxing He Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2021-05