使用镊子进行经皮脊髓活检的有效性和安全性

Junyeong Jeon, H. Shin, B. Park, J. H. Park, Jung Jae Lee
{"title":"使用镊子进行经皮脊髓活检的有效性和安全性","authors":"Junyeong Jeon, H. Shin, B. Park, J. H. Park, Jung Jae Lee","doi":"10.21129/nerve.2022.00059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Percutaneous spinal biopsy is an important tool in the detection and evaluation of patients with metastatic tumors, primary tumors, and infectious spondylitis. It has been reported that in lesions resistant to tissue-tearing, an accurate diagnosis via percutaneous needle biopsy is difficult. A few studies have performed spinal biopsy using forceps, which are mainly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy and transbronchial biopsy. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the safety and efficiency of performing bone biopsies using forceps. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent fluorosco-py-guided spinal bone biopsy from July 2013 to November 2020 for suspected spondylitis, tumor metastasis, and primary tumors based on spinal imaging. Data on patients’ demographic characteristics were collected from their electronic medical records. Procedure-related factors such as instrument type, diagnostic yield, procedure time, and the presence of specific lesions (necrotic, sclerosing, or cystic lesions) on preoperative imaging were investigated. Pain at the pathology site was checked using a visual analogue scale before and 1 day after the procedure. We divided the participants into two groups based on the instrument (flyer forceps or biopsy needle) used during the biopsy and analyzed each factor between the two groups. Results: A total of 30 patients (aged 12-81 years) underwent spinal biopsy using a biopsy needle (n=16) or flyer forceps (n=14). Spinal biopsy was performed on 20 patients with metastatic tumors, three with sarcoma, and nine with infections. There were no demographic differences between the two groups, and no difference in pain intensity before and after the procedure was observed between the two groups. The operation time was significantly shorter in the flyer forceps group than in the conventional biopsy needle group (p=0.02). The accuracy of the diagnostic yield of the biopsy was higher in the flyer forceps group (100%) than in the biopsy needle group (75%), and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.04). Conclusion: This study demonstrates the usefulness and safety of bone biopsies performed using flyer forceps. The use of flyer forceps in fluoroscopy-guided biopsy enables the effective collection of sufficient samples in a shorter time than conventional biopsy needles. Further-more, this procedure enabled more accurate diagnoses.","PeriodicalId":229172,"journal":{"name":"The Nerve","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficiency and Safety of Percutaneous Spinal Biopsy Using Forceps\",\"authors\":\"Junyeong Jeon, H. Shin, B. Park, J. H. Park, Jung Jae Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.21129/nerve.2022.00059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Percutaneous spinal biopsy is an important tool in the detection and evaluation of patients with metastatic tumors, primary tumors, and infectious spondylitis. It has been reported that in lesions resistant to tissue-tearing, an accurate diagnosis via percutaneous needle biopsy is difficult. A few studies have performed spinal biopsy using forceps, which are mainly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy and transbronchial biopsy. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the safety and efficiency of performing bone biopsies using forceps. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent fluorosco-py-guided spinal bone biopsy from July 2013 to November 2020 for suspected spondylitis, tumor metastasis, and primary tumors based on spinal imaging. Data on patients’ demographic characteristics were collected from their electronic medical records. Procedure-related factors such as instrument type, diagnostic yield, procedure time, and the presence of specific lesions (necrotic, sclerosing, or cystic lesions) on preoperative imaging were investigated. Pain at the pathology site was checked using a visual analogue scale before and 1 day after the procedure. We divided the participants into two groups based on the instrument (flyer forceps or biopsy needle) used during the biopsy and analyzed each factor between the two groups. Results: A total of 30 patients (aged 12-81 years) underwent spinal biopsy using a biopsy needle (n=16) or flyer forceps (n=14). Spinal biopsy was performed on 20 patients with metastatic tumors, three with sarcoma, and nine with infections. There were no demographic differences between the two groups, and no difference in pain intensity before and after the procedure was observed between the two groups. The operation time was significantly shorter in the flyer forceps group than in the conventional biopsy needle group (p=0.02). The accuracy of the diagnostic yield of the biopsy was higher in the flyer forceps group (100%) than in the biopsy needle group (75%), and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.04). Conclusion: This study demonstrates the usefulness and safety of bone biopsies performed using flyer forceps. The use of flyer forceps in fluoroscopy-guided biopsy enables the effective collection of sufficient samples in a shorter time than conventional biopsy needles. Further-more, this procedure enabled more accurate diagnoses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":229172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Nerve\",\"volume\":\"92 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Nerve\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21129/nerve.2022.00059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Nerve","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21129/nerve.2022.00059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:经皮脊髓活检是转移性肿瘤、原发肿瘤和感染性脊柱炎患者检测和评估的重要工具。据报道,在抵抗组织撕裂的病变中,通过经皮穿刺活检准确诊断是困难的。少数研究使用镊子进行脊柱活检,主要用于胃肠道内镜检查和经支气管活检。本研究的目的是证明使用镊子进行骨活检的安全性和有效性。方法:这项多中心回顾性研究纳入了2013年7月至2020年11月期间因脊柱成像疑似脊柱炎、肿瘤转移和原发性肿瘤而接受透视引导下脊柱骨活检的患者。从患者的电子病历中收集患者的人口统计学特征数据。手术相关因素,如器械类型、诊断率、手术时间和术前影像学上特定病变(坏死、硬化或囊性病变)的存在进行了研究。术前和术后1天用视觉模拟量表检查病理部位的疼痛。我们根据活检时使用的器械(飞片钳或活检针)将参与者分为两组,并分析两组之间的每个因素。结果:共有30例患者(年龄12-81岁)使用活检针(n=16)或飞片钳(n=14)进行了脊柱活检。对20例转移性肿瘤患者、3例肉瘤患者和9例感染患者进行了脊髓活检。两组间无统计学差异,手术前后疼痛强度无差异。飞片钳组手术时间明显短于常规活检针组(p=0.02)。飞片钳组活检诊断准确率(100%)高于活检针组(75%),差异有统计学意义(p=0.04)。结论:本研究证明了使用飞片钳进行骨活检的有效性和安全性。在透视引导下的活检中使用飞片钳可以在比传统活检针更短的时间内有效地收集足够的样本。此外,该程序使诊断更加准确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficiency and Safety of Percutaneous Spinal Biopsy Using Forceps
Objective: Percutaneous spinal biopsy is an important tool in the detection and evaluation of patients with metastatic tumors, primary tumors, and infectious spondylitis. It has been reported that in lesions resistant to tissue-tearing, an accurate diagnosis via percutaneous needle biopsy is difficult. A few studies have performed spinal biopsy using forceps, which are mainly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy and transbronchial biopsy. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the safety and efficiency of performing bone biopsies using forceps. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent fluorosco-py-guided spinal bone biopsy from July 2013 to November 2020 for suspected spondylitis, tumor metastasis, and primary tumors based on spinal imaging. Data on patients’ demographic characteristics were collected from their electronic medical records. Procedure-related factors such as instrument type, diagnostic yield, procedure time, and the presence of specific lesions (necrotic, sclerosing, or cystic lesions) on preoperative imaging were investigated. Pain at the pathology site was checked using a visual analogue scale before and 1 day after the procedure. We divided the participants into two groups based on the instrument (flyer forceps or biopsy needle) used during the biopsy and analyzed each factor between the two groups. Results: A total of 30 patients (aged 12-81 years) underwent spinal biopsy using a biopsy needle (n=16) or flyer forceps (n=14). Spinal biopsy was performed on 20 patients with metastatic tumors, three with sarcoma, and nine with infections. There were no demographic differences between the two groups, and no difference in pain intensity before and after the procedure was observed between the two groups. The operation time was significantly shorter in the flyer forceps group than in the conventional biopsy needle group (p=0.02). The accuracy of the diagnostic yield of the biopsy was higher in the flyer forceps group (100%) than in the biopsy needle group (75%), and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.04). Conclusion: This study demonstrates the usefulness and safety of bone biopsies performed using flyer forceps. The use of flyer forceps in fluoroscopy-guided biopsy enables the effective collection of sufficient samples in a shorter time than conventional biopsy needles. Further-more, this procedure enabled more accurate diagnoses.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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