Ya Ruth Huo1, Michael Vinchill Chan2,3, Al-Rahim Habib3, Isaac Lui2, Lloyd Ridley2. 1. Bankstown-Campbelltown Hospital, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 2. Department of Radiology, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 3. University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated risk factors for pneumothorax following CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic lung biopsy. METHODS: A systematic search of nine literature databases between inception to September 2019 for eligible studies was performed. RESULTS: 36 articles were included with 23,104 patients. The overall pooled incidence for pneumothorax was 25.9% and chest drain insertion was 6.9%. Pneumothorax risk was significantly reduced in the lateral decubitus position where the biopsied lung was dependent compared to a prone or supine position [odds ratio (OR):3.15]. In contrast, pneumothorax rates were significantly increased in the lateral decubitus position where the biopsied lung was non-dependent compared to supine (OR:2.28) or prone position (OR:3.20). Other risk factors for pneumothorax included puncture site up compared to down through a purpose-built biopsy window in the CT table (OR:4.79), larger calibre guide/needles (≤18G vs >18G: OR 1.55), fissure crossed (OR:3.75), bulla crossed (OR:6.13), multiple pleural punctures (>1 vs 1: OR:2.43), multiple non-coaxial tissue sample (>1 vs 1: OR 1.99), emphysematous lungs (OR:3.33), smaller lesions (<4 cm vs 4 cm: OR:2.09), lesions without pleural contact (OR:1.73) and deeper lesions (≥3 cm vs <3cm: OR:2.38). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis quantifies factors that alter pneumothorax rates, particularly with patient positioning, when planning and performing a CT-guided lung biopsy to reduce pneumothorax rates. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Positioning patients in lateral decubitus with the biopsied lung dependent, puncture site down with a biopsy window in the CT table, using smaller calibre needles and using coaxial technique if multiple samples are needed are associated with a reduced incidence of pneumothorax.
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated risk factors for pneumothorax following CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic lung biopsy. METHODS: A systematic search of nine literature databases between inception to September 2019 for eligible studies was performed. RESULTS: 36 articles were included with 23,104 patients. The overall pooled incidence for pneumothorax was 25.9% and chest drain insertion was 6.9%. Pneumothorax risk was significantly reduced in the lateral decubitus position where the biopsied lung was dependent compared to a prone or supine position [odds ratio (OR):3.15]. In contrast, pneumothorax rates were significantly increased in the lateral decubitus position where the biopsied lung was non-dependent compared to supine (OR:2.28) or prone position (OR:3.20). Other risk factors for pneumothorax included puncture site up compared to down through a purpose-built biopsy window in the CT table (OR:4.79), larger calibre guide/needles (≤18G vs >18G: OR 1.55), fissure crossed (OR:3.75), bulla crossed (OR:6.13), multiple pleural punctures (>1 vs 1: OR:2.43), multiple non-coaxial tissue sample (>1 vs 1: OR 1.99), emphysematous lungs (OR:3.33), smaller lesions (<4 cm vs 4 cm: OR:2.09), lesions without pleural contact (OR:1.73) and deeper lesions (≥3 cm vs <3cm: OR:2.38). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis quantifies factors that alter pneumothorax rates, particularly with patient positioning, when planning and performing a CT-guided lung biopsy to reduce pneumothorax rates. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Positioning patients in lateral decubitus with the biopsied lung dependent, puncture site down with a biopsy window in the CT table, using smaller calibre needles and using coaxial technique if multiple samples are needed are associated with a reduced incidence of pneumothorax.
Authors: Mohammad Hassan Murad; Victor M Montori; John P A Ioannidis; Roman Jaeschke; P J Devereaux; Kameshwar Prasad; Ignacio Neumann; Alonso Carrasco-Labra; Thomas Agoritsas; Rose Hatala; Maureen O Meade; Peter Wyer; Deborah J Cook; Gordon Guyatt Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Bippan S Sangha; Cameron J Hague; Jennifer Jessup; Robert O'Connor; John R Mayo Journal: Can Assoc Radiol J Date: 2016-03-19 Impact factor: 2.248
Authors: LaDonna J Malone; Robert M Stanfill; Huaping Wang; Kevin M Fahey; Raymond E Bertino Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Mario Ghosn; Waseem Cheema; Amy Zhu; Jennifer Livschitz; Majid Maybody; Franz E Boas; Ernesto Santos; DaeHee Kim; Jason A Beattie; Michael Offin; Valerie W Rusch; Marjorie G Zauderer; Prasad S Adusumilli; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 6.081
Authors: Puja Shahrouki; Jay M Lee; Jonathan Barclay; Sarah N Khan; Scott Genshaft; Fereidoun Abtin; Steven M Dubinett; Aaron Lisberg; Sherven Sharma; Edward B Garon; Robert Suh Journal: JTO Clin Res Rep Date: 2021-10-14