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 Citation Map 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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sheafor, D. H. Articles by Nelson, R. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sheafor, D. H. Articles by Nelson, R. C. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Comparison of Sonographic and CT Guidance Techniques

Does CT Fluoroscopy Decrease Procedure Time?

¹ All authors: Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3808, Erwin Rd., Durham, NC 27710.

OBJECTIVE. Procedure times for percutaneous biopsies were compared for various guidance techniques including helical CT, CT fluoroscopy, sonography with an attached needle guide, and freehand sonography with computer guidance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three interventional radiologists experienced in CT-and sonographically guided procedures performed biopsies on a phantom model. The phantom simulated hepatic metastases of various sizes and depths with subcostal or intercostal locations. Lesion sizes were 7, 10, and 20 mm, at 3- and 7-cm depths. Using self-aspirating needles, two passes were performed in each lesion. Mean procedure time per biopsy pass was calculated. A two-tailed Student's t test was used to compare guidance techniques.

RESULTS. Mean procedure time per biopsy pass for the four guidance techniques was sonography with a needle guide, 36 ± 9 sec; sonography with computer guidance, 43 ± 10 sec; helical CT, 146 ± 42 sec; and CT fluoroscopy, 50 ± 18 sec. CT fluoroscopy required 2.6 ± 1.0 sec per biopsy. Helical CT required more procedure time than sonography with a needle guide, CT with computer guidance, and CT fluoroscopy (p < 0.0001). Sonography with a needle guide required less procedure time than sonography with computer guidance (p < 0.002) and CT fluoroscopy (p = 0.0003). Procedure times for CT fluoroscopy and sonography with computer guidance were not statistically different (p = 0.06). CT and sonographic guidance were equally effective regardless of lesion size, depth, or location.

CONCLUSION. Traditional sonographic biopsy techniques are faster and more cost-effective than traditional CT techniques; however, CT fluoroscopy offers the localization advantages of CT with improved procedure times.

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. W. Mayo-Smith, M. V. Jayaraman, R. S. Han, D. E. Dupuy, and J. S. Movson Multiinstitutional Computer Database for Recording Nonvascular Imaging-Guided Interventions Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2003; 181(6): 1491 - 1493. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. A. Binkert, F. R. Verdun, M. Zanetti, C. W. Pfirrmann, and J. Hodler CT Arthrography of the Glenohumeral Joint: CT Fluoroscopy Versus Conventional CT and Fluoroscopy--Comparison of Image-Guidance Techniques Radiology, October 1, 2003; 229(1): 153 - 158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. E. Sakarya, O. Unal, B. Ozbay, K. Uzun, I. Kati, S. Ozen, and O. Etlik MR Fluoroscopy-guided Transthoracic Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy: Feasibility Radiology, August 1, 2003; 228(2): 589 - 592. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. K. Paulson, D. H. Sheafor, D. S. Enterline, H. P. McAdams, and T. T. Yoshizumi CT Fluoroscopy-guided Interventional Procedures: Techniques and Radiation Dose to Radiologists Radiology, July 1, 2001; 220(1): 161 - 167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. W. Mayo-Smith Administration of a CT Division Radiology, February 1, 2002; 222(2): 319 - 326. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]