Lan Chen1, He Jing1, Yun Gong1, Alda L Tam2, John Stewart1, Gregg Staerkel1, Ming Guo1. 1. Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 2. Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combined image-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNA) and core needle biopsy (CNB) has become the standard of care for diagnosis and/or molecular testing for patients with a solitary lung nodule at our institution. Our purpose was to evaluate the efficacy of this practice. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent combined lung FNA/CNB during 2012 at our institution. A total of 667 patients who underwent 682 combined lung FNA/CNB procedures were included in the study, including 355 men and 312 women. Combined lung FNA/CNB procedures were performed by a radiologist. The adequacy of FNA specimens was assessed immediately by a cytopathologist. The FNA and CNB specimens were interpreted separately by a cytopathologist and a surgical pathologist, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of the combined technique was determined. RESULTS: The rate of diagnostic consistency between FNA and CNB was 83.4%, and the rate of diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was 98.5% for combined FNA/CNB. Combined FNA/CNB showed a high diagnostic efficacy for malignancy (sensitivity, 97.6%; specificity, 100%). Combined FNA/CNB had a lower false-negative rate for malignancy (2.2%) than either FNA (7.2%) or CNB (6.2%) alone. FNA contributed to 10.3% of molecular analyses as a complementary tissue source. CONCLUSIONS: Combined lung FNA/CNB has high diagnostic efficacy for malignancy and a lower false-negative rate than either procedure alone. FNA was a valuable complement to CNB for molecular testing, potentially reducing patient inconvenience and morbidity associated with repeated lung needle biopsy.
BACKGROUND: Combined image-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNA) and core needle biopsy (CNB) has become the standard of care for diagnosis and/or molecular testing for patients with a solitary lung nodule at our institution. Our purpose was to evaluate the efficacy of this practice. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent combined lung FNA/CNB during 2012 at our institution. A total of 667 patients who underwent 682 combined lung FNA/CNB procedures were included in the study, including 355 men and 312 women. Combined lung FNA/CNB procedures were performed by a radiologist. The adequacy of FNA specimens was assessed immediately by a cytopathologist. The FNA and CNB specimens were interpreted separately by a cytopathologist and a surgical pathologist, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of the combined technique was determined. RESULTS: The rate of diagnostic consistency between FNA and CNB was 83.4%, and the rate of diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was 98.5% for combined FNA/CNB. Combined FNA/CNB showed a high diagnostic efficacy for malignancy (sensitivity, 97.6%; specificity, 100%). Combined FNA/CNB had a lower false-negative rate for malignancy (2.2%) than either FNA (7.2%) or CNB (6.2%) alone. FNA contributed to 10.3% of molecular analyses as a complementary tissue source. CONCLUSIONS: Combined lung FNA/CNB has high diagnostic efficacy for malignancy and a lower false-negative rate than either procedure alone. FNA was a valuable complement to CNB for molecular testing, potentially reducing patient inconvenience and morbidity associated with repeated lung needle biopsy.