Reduced Incidence of Pneumothorax and Chest Tube Placement following Transthoracic CT-Guided Lung Biopsy with Gelatin Sponge Torpedo Track Embolization: A Propensity Score–Matched Study

Sasikorn Feinggumloon, Panupong Radchauppanone, Tanapong Panpikoon, Chinnarat Buangam, Kaewpitcha Pichitpichatkul, T. Treesit
{"title":"Reduced Incidence of Pneumothorax and Chest Tube Placement following Transthoracic CT-Guided Lung Biopsy with Gelatin Sponge Torpedo Track Embolization: A Propensity Score–Matched Study","authors":"Sasikorn Feinggumloon, Panupong Radchauppanone, Tanapong Panpikoon, Chinnarat Buangam, Kaewpitcha Pichitpichatkul, T. Treesit","doi":"10.3390/jcm13164666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of track embolization using gelatin sponge torpedo in reducing the incidence of pneumothorax and chest tube placement after percutaneous CT-guided lung biopsy. Methods: A retrospective single-center analysis of percutaneous computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsies was performed between 2017 and 2022. After excluding the patients who received an ultrasound-guided biopsy, combined lung biopsy with ablation, fiducial placement, unsuccessful procedure due to uncooperative patient, and age under 18 years, 884 patients’ clinical information was collected (667 without track embolization and 217 with track embolization). The incidence of early and late pneumothorax and chest tube placement were compared between the two groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to minimize selection bias. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine risk factors for pneumothorax. Results: After PSM, the baseline differences and all factors that could affect the incidence of pneumothorax were balanced between the track embolization group (217 patients) and the non-track embolization group (217 patients). The incidence rates of early pneumothorax (13.4% vs. 24.0% p = 0.005), late pneumothorax (11.0% vs. 18.0% p = 0.021), and chest tube placement (0.9% vs. 4.6% p = 0.036) were significantly decreased in the track embolization group. However, the success rate of tissue diagnosis yield and length of hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups. In multivariate analysis, the risk of pneumothorax increased as the fissure was passed (OR = 3.719, p = 0.027). Conclusions: Using track embolization with a gelatin sponge torpedo significantly decreased the incidence of pneumothorax and chest tube placement following percutaneous CT-guided lung biopsy.","PeriodicalId":510228,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","volume":"7 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13164666","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of track embolization using gelatin sponge torpedo in reducing the incidence of pneumothorax and chest tube placement after percutaneous CT-guided lung biopsy. Methods: A retrospective single-center analysis of percutaneous computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsies was performed between 2017 and 2022. After excluding the patients who received an ultrasound-guided biopsy, combined lung biopsy with ablation, fiducial placement, unsuccessful procedure due to uncooperative patient, and age under 18 years, 884 patients’ clinical information was collected (667 without track embolization and 217 with track embolization). The incidence of early and late pneumothorax and chest tube placement were compared between the two groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to minimize selection bias. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine risk factors for pneumothorax. Results: After PSM, the baseline differences and all factors that could affect the incidence of pneumothorax were balanced between the track embolization group (217 patients) and the non-track embolization group (217 patients). The incidence rates of early pneumothorax (13.4% vs. 24.0% p = 0.005), late pneumothorax (11.0% vs. 18.0% p = 0.021), and chest tube placement (0.9% vs. 4.6% p = 0.036) were significantly decreased in the track embolization group. However, the success rate of tissue diagnosis yield and length of hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups. In multivariate analysis, the risk of pneumothorax increased as the fissure was passed (OR = 3.719, p = 0.027). Conclusions: Using track embolization with a gelatin sponge torpedo significantly decreased the incidence of pneumothorax and chest tube placement following percutaneous CT-guided lung biopsy.
使用明胶海绵鱼雷轨道栓塞术进行经胸CT引导肺活检后气胸和放置胸管的发生率降低:倾向评分匹配研究
目的评估使用明胶海绵鱼雷进行轨道栓塞在减少经皮 CT 引导肺活检后气胸和胸管置入的发生率方面的有效性。方法:单中心回顾性分析对2017年至2022年间经皮计算机断层扫描(CT)引导的经胸肺活检进行了单中心回顾性分析。在排除了接受超声引导活检、肺活检与消融术联合、靶标置入、因患者不合作导致手术不成功以及年龄小于18岁的患者后,收集了884名患者的临床信息(667名患者未进行轨道栓塞,217名患者进行了轨道栓塞)。比较了两组患者早期和晚期气胸以及胸管置入的发生率。为尽量减少选择偏差,采用了倾向评分匹配法(PSM)。为确定气胸的风险因素,进行了单变量和多变量分析。结果:经过倾向评分匹配后,轨道栓塞组(217 名患者)和非轨道栓塞组(217 名患者)之间的基线差异和所有可能影响气胸发生率的因素都达到了平衡。轨道栓塞组早期气胸(13.4% 对 24.0% p = 0.005)、晚期气胸(11.0% 对 18.0% p = 0.021)和胸腔置管(0.9% 对 4.6% p = 0.036)的发生率显著降低。然而,两组患者的组织诊断成功率和住院时间并无明显差异。在多变量分析中,气胸的风险随着裂隙的通过而增加(OR = 3.719,P = 0.027)。结论使用明胶海绵鱼雷进行轨道栓塞可显著降低经皮 CT 引导肺活检后气胸和胸管置入的发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信