[ct引导穿刺:细针活检与自动同轴切割活检]。

Aktuelle Radiologie Pub Date : 1998-11-01
H J Skamel, A Hanusch, K Mathias
{"title":"[ct引导穿刺:细针活检与自动同轴切割活检]。","authors":"H J Skamel,&nbsp;A Hanusch,&nbsp;K Mathias","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Comparison between fine needle aspiration (FNAB) and automated coaxial core biopsy (ACCB) of CT-guided thoracal and abdominal biopsies.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>98 patients had CT-guided biopsies of the liver (n = 26), lung (n = 36), pancreas (n = 8), presacral space (n = 16), retroperitoneum (n = 8), groin (n = 1) and mediastinum (n = 3). In 50 patients fine needle aspiration, in 48 patients ACCB was performed. Nine physicians, two of them with advanced experience, performed the procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Histologically satisfying material was achieved in 76% of the biopsies with FNAB, in 100% with ACCB. The sensitivity within the FNAB group was 59.6%, within ACCB group 97.5%. Sensitivity for the whole group was 76.7%. In pulmonary lesions the sensitivity was increased to 100% by using the ACCB method in comparison to FNAB (58%), in liver lesions from 75% (FNAB) to 92% (ACCB). 19 of 20 false negative specimens were obtained with FNAB. The less experienced physicians had a false negative rate of 43% with FNA biopsies, but only 2.2% with ACCB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In pulmonary and abdominal lesions ACCB is a procedure with rare complications and low invasivity, which is not dependent on the performing person. ACCB has a high diagnostic accuracy and should replace FNAB.</p>","PeriodicalId":76986,"journal":{"name":"Aktuelle Radiologie","volume":"8 6","pages":"273-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[CT-guided punctures: fine-needle biopsy vs. automated co-axial cutting biopsy].\",\"authors\":\"H J Skamel,&nbsp;A Hanusch,&nbsp;K Mathias\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Comparison between fine needle aspiration (FNAB) and automated coaxial core biopsy (ACCB) of CT-guided thoracal and abdominal biopsies.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>98 patients had CT-guided biopsies of the liver (n = 26), lung (n = 36), pancreas (n = 8), presacral space (n = 16), retroperitoneum (n = 8), groin (n = 1) and mediastinum (n = 3). In 50 patients fine needle aspiration, in 48 patients ACCB was performed. Nine physicians, two of them with advanced experience, performed the procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Histologically satisfying material was achieved in 76% of the biopsies with FNAB, in 100% with ACCB. The sensitivity within the FNAB group was 59.6%, within ACCB group 97.5%. Sensitivity for the whole group was 76.7%. In pulmonary lesions the sensitivity was increased to 100% by using the ACCB method in comparison to FNAB (58%), in liver lesions from 75% (FNAB) to 92% (ACCB). 19 of 20 false negative specimens were obtained with FNAB. The less experienced physicians had a false negative rate of 43% with FNA biopsies, but only 2.2% with ACCB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In pulmonary and abdominal lesions ACCB is a procedure with rare complications and low invasivity, which is not dependent on the performing person. ACCB has a high diagnostic accuracy and should replace FNAB.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aktuelle Radiologie\",\"volume\":\"8 6\",\"pages\":\"273-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aktuelle Radiologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aktuelle Radiologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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:比较ct引导下胸腹活检的细针穿刺(FNAB)和自动同轴核心活检(ACCB)。方法:98例患者行ct引导下肝(26例)、肺(36例)、胰腺(8例)、骶前间隙(16例)、腹膜后(8例)、腹股沟(1例)、纵隔(3例)活检。50例患者行细针穿刺,48例行ACCB。9名医生进行了手术,其中2名经验丰富。结果:FNAB活检的组织学满意率为76%,ACCB活检的组织学满意率为100%。FNAB组敏感性为59.6%,ACCB组敏感性为97.5%。全组敏感性为76.7%。与FNAB(58%)相比,使用ACCB方法对肺部病变的敏感性提高到100%,对肝脏病变的敏感性从75% (FNAB)提高到92% (ACCB)。20例假阴性标本中,FNAB检出19例。经验不足的医生FNA活检的假阴性率为43%,而ACCB活检的假阴性率仅为2.2%。结论:对于肺部和腹部病变,ACCB是一种并发症少、侵入性低的手术,不依赖于手术者。ACCB诊断准确率高,宜替代FNAB。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[CT-guided punctures: fine-needle biopsy vs. automated co-axial cutting biopsy].

Purpose: Comparison between fine needle aspiration (FNAB) and automated coaxial core biopsy (ACCB) of CT-guided thoracal and abdominal biopsies.

Method: 98 patients had CT-guided biopsies of the liver (n = 26), lung (n = 36), pancreas (n = 8), presacral space (n = 16), retroperitoneum (n = 8), groin (n = 1) and mediastinum (n = 3). In 50 patients fine needle aspiration, in 48 patients ACCB was performed. Nine physicians, two of them with advanced experience, performed the procedure.

Results: Histologically satisfying material was achieved in 76% of the biopsies with FNAB, in 100% with ACCB. The sensitivity within the FNAB group was 59.6%, within ACCB group 97.5%. Sensitivity for the whole group was 76.7%. In pulmonary lesions the sensitivity was increased to 100% by using the ACCB method in comparison to FNAB (58%), in liver lesions from 75% (FNAB) to 92% (ACCB). 19 of 20 false negative specimens were obtained with FNAB. The less experienced physicians had a false negative rate of 43% with FNA biopsies, but only 2.2% with ACCB.

Conclusion: In pulmonary and abdominal lesions ACCB is a procedure with rare complications and low invasivity, which is not dependent on the performing person. ACCB has a high diagnostic accuracy and should replace FNAB.

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