A comparison between CT-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy with core-needle biopsy for pancreatic lesions
10.3760/cma.j.cn113884-20220525-00224
- VernacularTitle:CT引导下抽吸活检与CT引导下切割活检用于诊断胰腺占位性病变的对比研究
- Author:
Meng WANG
1
;
Zhigang ZHOU
;
Shuai LI
;
Kepu DU
;
Yadan LI
;
Fei GAO
;
Jianbo GAO
Author Information
1. 郑州大学第一附属医院放射科，郑州 450052
- Keywords:
Image-guided biopsy;
Fine-needle aspiration biopsy;
Core-needle biopsy;
Pancreatic lesion
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery
2022;28(10):761-765
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the safety and clinical value of percutaneous computed tomography (CT)-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (CT-FNA) with CT-guided core-needle biopsy (CT-CNB) in diagnosis of pancreatic lesions.Methods:We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients with pancreatic lesions who underwent percutaneous CT-guided biopsy from January 2017 to January 2022 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. A total of 454 patients (251 men, 203 women) were enrolled in this study with age of (60.5±11.6) years old. They were divided into the CT-FNA group ( n=300) and the CT-CNB group ( n=154) according to the biopsy method. The one-time diagnosis rate, accuracy, sensitivity, false negative rate and incidence rate of complications of the two groups were compared. Results:The one-time diagnosis rate and accuracy rate in the CT-CNB group were slightly higher than those in the CT-FNA group, but the differences were not statistically significant [92.2%(142/154) vs. 86.0%(258/300), χ 2=3.74, P=0.053; 97.4%(150/154) vs. 92.0%(276/300), χ 2=0.16, P=0.690]. Compared with the CT-FNA group, the CT-CNB group had a higher sensitivity and a lower false negative rate, and the differences were statistically significant [97.2%(138/142) vs. 91.5%(260/284), χ 2=4.89, P=0.036; 2.8%(4/142) vs. 8.5%(24/284), χ 2=4.89, P=0.036]. Common complications in the two groups were pain, hematoma and pancreatitis, and there was no statistically significant difference in the incidences of complication [9.0%(27/300) vs. 9.1%(14/154), χ 2<0.01, P=0.975]. Conclusions:Both CT-FNA and CT-CNB were safe for diagnosis of pancreatic lesions, with high diagnostic yields and with similar safety and accuracy. When compared with CT-FNA, CT-CNB has a higher sensitivity and a lower false negative rate.
