The British journal of radiology · 2011
Comparison of fully automated and semi-automated biopsy needles for lung biopsy under CT fluoroscopic guidance.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yoshimatsu R, Yamagami T, Tanaka O, Miura H, Tanaka T, Suzuki T, Nishimura T
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare two different automated biopsy needles, a fully automated biopsy needle (Monopty; Bard, Covington, GA) and a semi-automated biopsy needle (Temno; Bauer Medical, Clearwater, FL), for lung biopsy.
METHODS: 50 consecutive percutaneous lung biopsies using the Monopty needle between June 2006 and January 2007 and 66 consecutive lung biopsies for 1 nodule in each session using the Temno needle between February 2007 and August 2008 were performed under CT fluoroscopic guidance followed by histopathological evaluation.
RESULTS: In 42/50 lung biopsies performed with the Monopty needle and 54/66 lung biopsies performed with the Temno needle, the final diagnosis was confirmed by independent surgical pathological findings or clinical follow-up. Sufficient samples for histopathological evaluation were obtained in all 50 (100%) biopsies using the Monopty needle and in 55 (83.3%) of the 66 biopsies using the Temno needle (p<0.01). Accurate diagnosis was achieved in 41 (97.6%) of 42 biopsies using the Monopty needle and in 45 (83.3%) of 54 biopsies using the Temno needle (p=0.04). Biopsy-induced complications were pneumothorax, haemoptysis and haemothorax in 44.0%, 10.0% and 6.0% of biopsies, respectively, using the Monopty needle and in 48.3%, 8.3% and 3.3%, respectively, using the Temno needle.
CONCLUSION: There is a possibility that a fully automated biopsy needle such as the Monopty is more useful for CT scan-guided lung biopsy than semi-automated biopsy needles.
METHODS: 50 consecutive percutaneous lung biopsies using the Monopty needle between June 2006 and January 2007 and 66 consecutive lung biopsies for 1 nodule in each session using the Temno needle between February 2007 and August 2008 were performed under CT fluoroscopic guidance followed by histopathological evaluation.
RESULTS: In 42/50 lung biopsies performed with the Monopty needle and 54/66 lung biopsies performed with the Temno needle, the final diagnosis was confirmed by independent surgical pathological findings or clinical follow-up. Sufficient samples for histopathological evaluation were obtained in all 50 (100%) biopsies using the Monopty needle and in 55 (83.3%) of the 66 biopsies using the Temno needle (p<0.01). Accurate diagnosis was achieved in 41 (97.6%) of 42 biopsies using the Monopty needle and in 45 (83.3%) of 54 biopsies using the Temno needle (p=0.04). Biopsy-induced complications were pneumothorax, haemoptysis and haemothorax in 44.0%, 10.0% and 6.0% of biopsies, respectively, using the Monopty needle and in 48.3%, 8.3% and 3.3%, respectively, using the Temno needle.
CONCLUSION: There is a possibility that a fully automated biopsy needle such as the Monopty is more useful for CT scan-guided lung biopsy than semi-automated biopsy needles.