Prospective Randomized Trial for Image-Guided Biopsy Using Cone-Beam CT Navigation Compared with Conventional CT

Overview

Journal J Vasc Interv Radiol

Specialties Cardiology & Vascular Diseases
Radiology

Date 2016 Jul 28

PMID 27461586

Citations 17

Authors

Nadine Abi-Jaoudeh

Teresa Fisher

John Jacobus

Marlene Skopec

Alessandro Radaelli

Imramsjah Martijn van der Bom

Robert Wesley

Bradford J Wood

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare cone-beam computed tomography (CT) navigation vs conventional CT image guidance during biopsies.

Materials And Methods: Patients scheduled for image-guided biopsies were prospectively and randomly assigned to conventional CT guidance vs cone-beam CT navigation. Radiation dose, accuracy of final needle position, rate of histopathologic diagnosis, and number of needle repositions to reach the target (defined as pullback to adjust position) were compared.

Results: A total of 58 patients (mean age, 57 y; 62.1% men) were randomized: 29 patients underwent 33 biopsies with CT guidance and 29 patients with 33 lesions underwent biopsy with cone-beam CT navigation. The average body mass index (BMI) was similar between groups, at 28.8 kg/m(2) ± 6.55 (P = .18). There was no difference between groups in terms of patient and lesion characteristics (eg, size, depth). The average lesion size was 29.1 ± 12.7mm for CT group vs 32.1mm ±16.8mm for cone-beam CT group (P < 0.59). Location of lesions was equally divided between the 2 groups, 20 lung lesions, 18 renal lesions and 20 other abdominal lesions. Mean number of needle repositions in the cone-beam CT group was 0.3 ± 0.5, compared with 1.9 ± 2.3 with conventional CT (P < .001). The average skin entry dose was 29% lower with cone-beam CT than with conventional CT (P < .04 accounting for BMI). The average estimated effective dose for the planning scan from phantom data was 49% lower with cone-beam CT vs conventional CT (P = .018). Accuracy, defined as the difference between planned and final needle positions, was 4.9 mm ± 4.1 for the cone-beam CT group, compared with 12.2 mm ± 8.1 for conventional CT (P < .001). Histopathologic diagnosis rates were similar between groups, at 90.9% for conventional CT and 93.9% for cone-beam CT (P = .67).

Conclusions: Cone-beam CT navigation for biopsies improved targeting accuracy with fewer needle repositions, lower skin entry dose, and lower effective dose for planning scan, and a comparable histopathologic diagnosis rate.

Citing Articles

Universal non-circular cone beam CT orbits for metal artifact reduction imaging during image-guided procedures.

Reynolds T, Ma Y, Kanawati A, Dillon O, Baer K, Gang G Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):26274.

PMID: 39487233 PMC: 11530422. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-77964-9.

Investigating 4D respiratory cone-beam CT imaging for thoracic interventions on robotic C-arm systems: a deformable phantom study.

Reynolds T, Dillon O, Ma Y, Hindley N, Stayman J, Bazalova-Carter M Phys Eng Sci Med. 2024; 47(4):1751-1762.

PMID: 39446304 PMC: 11666758. DOI: 10.1007/s13246-024-01491-0.

Cone Beam Computed Tomography for the Interventional Oncologist: A Practical Approach.

May B, Charalel R Semin Intervent Radiol. 2024; 41(3):252-257.

PMID: 39165650 PMC: 11333112. DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1788006.

Chinese expert consensus on cone-beam CT-guided diagnosis, localization and treatment for pulmonary nodules.

Xu D, Xie F, Zhang J, Chen H, Chen Z, Guan Z Thorac Cancer. 2024; 15(7):582-597.

PMID: 38337087 PMC: 10912555. DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.15222.

Percutaneous microwave ablation for lung tumors: a retrospective case-control study of conventional CT and C-arm CT guidance.

Du K, Liu Y, Wu K, Sun Z, Han X, Jiao D Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023; 13(9):5737-5747.

PMID: 37711800 PMC: 10498196. DOI: 10.21037/qims-22-985.

References

Sainani N, Arellano R, Shyn P, Gervais D, Mueller P, Silverman S . The challenging image-guided abdominal mass biopsy: established and emerging techniques 'if you can see it, you can biopsy it'. Abdom Imaging. 2013; 38(4):672-96. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-013-9980-0. View

Kelloff G, Sigman C . Cancer biomarkers: selecting the right drug for the right patient. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012; 11(3):201-14. DOI: 10.1038/nrd3651. View

Tam A, Lim H, Wistuba I, Tamrazi A, Kuo M, Ziv E . Image-Guided Biopsy in the Era of Personalized Cancer Care: Proceedings from the Society of Interventional Radiology Research Consensus Panel. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015; 27(1):8-19. PMC: 5056791. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2015.10.019. View

Strocchi S, Colli V, Conte L . Multidetector CT fluoroscopy and cone-beam CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic biopsy: comparison based on patient doses. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2012; 151(1):162-5. DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncr464. View

Wang Y, Li W, He X, Li G, Xu L . Computed tomography-guided core needle biopsy of lung lesions: Diagnostic yield and correlation between factors and complications. Oncol Lett. 2013; 7(1):288-294. PMC: 3861590. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2013.1680. View

Jin K, Park C, Goo J, Lee H, Lee Y, Kim J . Initial experience of percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy of lung nodules using C-arm cone-beam CT systems. Eur Radiol. 2010; 20(9):2108-15. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1783-x. View

Basik M, Aguilar-Mahecha A, Rousseau C, Diaz Z, Tejpar S, Spatz A . Biopsies: next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013; 10(8):437-50. DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.101. View

Ishikawa E, Nomura S, Hamaguchi T, Obe T, Inoue-Kiyohara M, Oosugi K . Ultrasonography as a predictor of overt bleeding after renal biopsy. Clin Exp Nephrol. 2009; 13(4):325-331. DOI: 10.1007/s10157-009-0165-7. View

Venkatesan A, Kadoury S, Abi-Jaoudeh N, Levy E, Maass-Moreno R, Krucker J . Real-time FDG PET guidance during biopsies and radiofrequency ablation using multimodality fusion with electromagnetic navigation. Radiology. 2011; 260(3):848-56. PMC: 3157001. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11101985. View

10.

Abi-Jaoudeh N, Mielekamp P, Noordhoek N, Venkatesan A, Millo C, Radaelli A . Cone-beam computed tomography fusion and navigation for real-time positron emission tomography-guided biopsies and ablations: a feasibility study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012; 23(6):737-43. PMC: 3360836. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2012.02.006. View

11.

Montanari D, Scolari E, Silvestri C, Graves Y, Yan H, Cervino L . Comprehensive evaluations of cone-beam CT dose in image-guided radiation therapy via GPU-based Monte Carlo simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2014; 59(5):1239-53. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/5/1239. View

12.

McGahan J . Challenges in abdominal/pelvic biopsy techniques. Abdom Imaging. 2013; 38(5):1043-56. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-013-0006-8. View

13.

. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007; 37(2-4):1-332. DOI: 10.1016/j.icrp.2007.10.003. View

14.

Mammarappallil J, Hiatt K, Ge Q, Clark H . Computed tomography fluoroscopy versus conventional computed tomography guidance for biopsy of intrathoracic lesions: a retrospective review of 1143 consecutive procedures. J Thorac Imaging. 2014; 29(6):340-3. DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000109. View

15.

Wiener R, Schwartz L, Woloshin S, Welch H . Population-based risk for complications after transthoracic needle lung biopsy of a pulmonary nodule: an analysis of discharge records. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155(3):137-44. PMC: 3150964. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-3-201108020-00003. View

16.

Braak S, van Strijen M, van Es H, Nievelstein R, van Heesewijk J . Effective dose during needle interventions: cone-beam CT guidance compared with conventional CT guidance. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011; 22(4):455-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2011.02.011. View

17.

Abi-Jaoudeh N, Kruecker J, Kadoury S, Kobeiter H, Venkatesan A, Levy E . Multimodality image fusion-guided procedures: technique, accuracy, and applications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012; 35(5):986-98. PMC: 3447988. DOI: 10.1007/s00270-012-0446-5. View

18.

Eiro M, Katoh T, Watanabe T . Risk factors for bleeding complications in percutaneous renal biopsy. Clin Exp Nephrol. 2005; 9(1):40-5. DOI: 10.1007/s10157-004-0326-7. View

19.

Braak S, van Melick H, Onaca M, van Heesewijk J, van Strijen M . 3D cone-beam CT guidance, a novel technique in renal biopsy--results in 41 patients with suspected renal masses. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22(11):2547-52. PMC: 3472072. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2498-y. View

20.

Choo J, Park C, Lee N, Lee S, Lee H, Goo J . Percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy of small (≤ 1 cm) lung nodules under C-arm cone-beam CT virtual navigation guidance. Eur Radiol. 2012; 23(3):712-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2644-6. View