HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chen, M. Y. M. Articles by Savage, P. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chen, M. Y. M. Articles by Savage, P. D. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Is It Necessary to Biopsy the Obvious?

¹ Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Blvd., Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1088.
² Department of Hematology-Oncology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1088.

OBJECTIVE. The radiologist and oncologist are often confident that biopsy will confirm their suspicion of recurrent disease, but a biopsy is performed to confirm the histologic diagnosis before beginning or altering therapy. We have examined data to determine how often the biopsied lesion represents recurrent disease from the primary tumor or is an instance of new cancer, and whether recurrent disease can be predicted.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. We reviewed the medical and imaging records of 253 patients who underwent CT-guided biopsy of an abdominal or pelvic lesion between 1993 and 1996. Sixty-nine of the 253 patients had a previously diagnosed primary tumor and were being examined for possible tumor recurrence or metastasis. The images of these 69 patients were analyzed to determine if the pattern of disease was typical of recurrence or metastasis.

RESULTS. In 55 of the 69 patients, the pattern was judged to be typical of metastatic or recurrent disease. Biopsy confirmed this suspicion in all 55 patients. In 14 of the 69 patients, the pattern of spread was judged not to be typical of recurrence or metastasis. These 14 patients were found to have a new primary tumor (n = 4), benign processes (n = 2), and recurrences (n = 8).

CONCLUSION. Of the patients for whom radiographic findings suggested recurrence, we found no patients in whom a new primary tumor would have been missed if biopsy had been avoided. Data should now be acquired prospectively to determine whether it may be prudent to make treatment decisions on the basis of imaging findings alone, without histologic confirmation.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?