Zheng-Yang Wu1, De-Chao Jiao1, Fang-Fang Guo2, Dan-Dan Zhang3, Jian-Zhuang Ren1, Xin-Wei Han1. 1. Department of Interventional Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China. 2. Department of Pathology, Zhengzhou University People's Hospital & Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Zhengzhou, China. 3. Department of Pathology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to compare the clinical results and pathological diagnostic quality of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy for biliary obstruction using biopsy forceps (BFs) of varying diameter. METHODS: A total of 57 patients with obstructive jaundice who underwent percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy and drainage with 1 of 2 BFs diameters (6.0-mm BFs, n=30; 4.5-mm BFs, n=27) between February 2018 and May 2019 were retrospectively assessed. BFs were compared in terms of their sample quality, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, number of passes, and complication rate. RESULTS: All 57 patients underwent the procedure successfully and the technical success rate was 100%. The 6.0- and 4.5-mm BFs demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy of 80% (24/30) and 85% (23/27), respectively (P=0.733), and a sensitivity of 78% (22/28) and 86% (22/26), respectively (P=0.729). The specificity of both the 6.0- and 4.5-mm BFs was 100%. The complication rate was 10% (3/30) with the 6.0-mm BFs and 19% (5/27) with the 4.5-mm BFs (P=0.456). The mean number of biopsies was 2.9±0.6 with the 6.0-mm BFs compared with 3.6±1.0 with the 4.5-mm BFs (P<0.001). The 6.0-mm BFs provided a larger biopsy size and a less crushed specimen compared with the 4.5-mm BFs. The overall tissue scores were 5.2±0.8 with 6.0-mm BFs and 4.5±1.0 with 4.5-mm BFs (P=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in the clinical results between the 2 BFs in the context of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy. Superior samples were obtained using the 6.0-mm BFs, with a fewer number of passes. The complication rate did not increase compared with the 4.5-mm BFs. 2022 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to compare the clinical results and pathological diagnostic quality of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy for biliary obstruction using biopsy forceps (BFs) of varying diameter. METHODS: A total of 57 patients with obstructive jaundice who underwent percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy and drainage with 1 of 2 BFs diameters (6.0-mm BFs, n=30; 4.5-mm BFs, n=27) between February 2018 and May 2019 were retrospectively assessed. BFs were compared in terms of their sample quality, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, number of passes, and complication rate. RESULTS: All 57 patients underwent the procedure successfully and the technical success rate was 100%. The 6.0- and 4.5-mm BFs demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy of 80% (24/30) and 85% (23/27), respectively (P=0.733), and a sensitivity of 78% (22/28) and 86% (22/26), respectively (P=0.729). The specificity of both the 6.0- and 4.5-mm BFs was 100%. The complication rate was 10% (3/30) with the 6.0-mm BFs and 19% (5/27) with the 4.5-mm BFs (P=0.456). The mean number of biopsies was 2.9±0.6 with the 6.0-mm BFs compared with 3.6±1.0 with the 4.5-mm BFs (P<0.001). The 6.0-mm BFs provided a larger biopsy size and a less crushed specimen compared with the 4.5-mm BFs. The overall tissue scores were 5.2±0.8 with 6.0-mm BFs and 4.5±1.0 with 4.5-mm BFs (P=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in the clinical results between the 2 BFs in the context of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiobiopsy. Superior samples were obtained using the 6.0-mm BFs, with a fewer number of passes. The complication rate did not increase compared with the 4.5-mm BFs. 2022 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Authors: Omid Khalilzadeh; Mark O Baerlocher; Paul B Shyn; Bairbre L Connolly; A Michael Devane; Christopher S Morris; Alan M Cohen; Mehran Midia; Raymond H Thornton; Kathleen Gross; Drew M Caplin; Gunjan Aeron; Sanjay Misra; Nilesh H Patel; T Gregory Walker; Gloria Martinez-Salazar; James E Silberzweig; Boris Nikolic Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2017-07-27 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Jung Gu Park; Gyoo-Sik Jung; Jong Hyouk Yun; Byung Chul Yun; Sang Uk Lee; Byung Hoon Han; Ji Ho Ko Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: B Joseph Elmunzer; Peter D R Higgins; Yong M Kwon; Christopher Golembeski; Joel K Greenson; Sheryl J Korsnes; Grace H Elta Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2007-12-26 Impact factor: 9.427