Clinical audit; freehand renal biopsy, still a suitable method?

Q4 Medicine
M. Garozzo, F. Pagni, V. L’Imperio, G. Battaglia
{"title":"Clinical audit; freehand renal biopsy, still a suitable method?","authors":"M. Garozzo, F. Pagni, V. L’Imperio, G. Battaglia","doi":"10.34172/jnp.2022.17308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Freehand renal biopsy represents a valid alternative to the most widespread ultrasonography-guided technique, although some concerns can derive from the possible increased complication rate and lower adequacy rate. Objectives: In the present audit study, efficacy of freehand method have been established through the analysis of 328 consecutive renal biopsies in 322 patients, instead the safety of the procedure was assessed in 196 patients. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed hospital databases of all patients who underwent a percutaneous renal biopsy over an 18 years’ period at Santa Marta and Santa Venera hospital in Acireale. Results: The procedure led to a definitive diagnosis in the majority of cases (98.48%), being uninformative only in 5 out of 328 cases (1.52%). Comparing these results against a Proforma, resulting from analysis of best literature reports for the items studied, adverse event rates were similar. Conclusion: Freehand renal biopsy resulted a good option to obtain renal tissue, without serious side effects. We argue about safety and we prefer to reserve this invasive procedure to selected cases, avoiding renal biopsy if biochemical and instrumental data allow a definitive diagnosis as well as in high risk patients. Our policy protects patients from the adverse effects that can result from kidney biopsy.","PeriodicalId":16515,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nephropathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nephropathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jnp.2022.17308","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Freehand renal biopsy represents a valid alternative to the most widespread ultrasonography-guided technique, although some concerns can derive from the possible increased complication rate and lower adequacy rate. Objectives: In the present audit study, efficacy of freehand method have been established through the analysis of 328 consecutive renal biopsies in 322 patients, instead the safety of the procedure was assessed in 196 patients. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed hospital databases of all patients who underwent a percutaneous renal biopsy over an 18 years’ period at Santa Marta and Santa Venera hospital in Acireale. Results: The procedure led to a definitive diagnosis in the majority of cases (98.48%), being uninformative only in 5 out of 328 cases (1.52%). Comparing these results against a Proforma, resulting from analysis of best literature reports for the items studied, adverse event rates were similar. Conclusion: Freehand renal biopsy resulted a good option to obtain renal tissue, without serious side effects. We argue about safety and we prefer to reserve this invasive procedure to selected cases, avoiding renal biopsy if biochemical and instrumental data allow a definitive diagnosis as well as in high risk patients. Our policy protects patients from the adverse effects that can result from kidney biopsy.
临床审计;徒手肾活检,还是一种合适的方法吗?
导论:徒手肾活检是一种有效的替代最广泛的超声引导技术,尽管一些担忧可能会增加并发症的发生率和较低的充分率。目的:在本审计研究中,通过对322例患者328例连续肾活检的分析,确立了徒手法的有效性,而对196例患者的安全性进行了评估。患者和方法:我们回顾性地回顾了18年来在acreale Santa Marta和Santa Venera医院接受经皮肾活检的所有患者的医院数据库。结果:绝大多数病例(98.48%)可明确诊断,328例病例中仅有5例(1.52%)信息不清。将这些结果与研究项目的最佳文献报告分析得出的形式报告进行比较,不良事件发生率相似。结论:徒手肾活检是获得肾组织的良好选择,无严重的副作用。我们争论安全性,我们倾向于将这种侵入性手术保留给选定的病例,如果生化和仪器数据允许明确的诊断,以及在高风险患者中,避免肾活检。我们的政策保护患者免受肾活检可能造成的不良影响。
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
Journal of Nephropathology
Journal of Nephropathology Medicine-Nephrology
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信