Premium
Use of a self‐contained vacuum‐assisted biopsy system in the assessment of soft tissue tumors
Author(s) -
SimidjiiskaBelyaeva Maria,
Belyaev Orlin,
Lehnhardt Marcus,
Harati Kamran,
Stricker Ingo,
Nicolas Volkmar,
Daigeler Adrien
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of surgical oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.201
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1096-9098
pISSN - 0022-4790
DOI - 10.1002/jso.25609
Subject(s) - medicine , biopsy , grading (engineering) , incisional biopsy , soft tissue , radiology , soft tissue sarcoma , sarcoma , diagnostic accuracy , needle biopsy , computed tomography , nuclear medicine , pathology , civil engineering , engineering
Background and Objective This is the first study to compare the safety and efficacy of vacuum‐assisted biopsy (VAB) using a self‐contained hand‐held system compared to those of ultrasound‐guided and computed tomography‐guided core needle biopsy (US‐CNB and CT‐CNB) and to incisional biopsy (IB). Methods VAB was performed in an outpatient setting under local anesthesia. Safety, diagnostic accuracy, time, and cost expenditures of biopsy were compared between VAB, US‐CNB, CT‐CNB, and IB in 211 consecutive patients. Results VAB was applied in 78 patients, US‐CNB in 51, CT‐CNB in 45, and IB in 37. Patient characteristics did not differ between groups. Sample volume of VAB was 392.5 mm 3 , 4062 mm 3 for IB, and 25.1 to 34.5 mm 3 for CNB, P < .001. VAB discriminated between malignant and benign lesions with the highest accuracy of 96% and determined sarcoma grading accurately in 95%. VAB and CNB had no complications vs 5% for IB. Duration of VAB was 5 ± 2 minutes, equal to US‐CNB and shorter than CT‐CNB and IB. Expenditures for VAB were higher than for US‐CNB and lower than CT‐CNB and IB. Conclusion VAB is an accurate, safe, cost‐effective, and time‐saving outpatient diagnostic procedure for patients with soft‐tissue tumors and presents a viable alternative to IB.