Show simple item record

Diagnostic yield of percutaneous image‐guided tissue biopsy of focal hepatic lesions in cancer patients

dc.contributor.authorElsayes, Khaled M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorEllis, James H.en_US
dc.contributor.authorElkhouly, Tohamyen_US
dc.contributor.authorReam, Justin M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBowerson, Michylaen_US
dc.contributor.authorKhan, Asra S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCaoili, Elaine M.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-11-10T15:30:53Z
dc.date.available2012-11-02T18:56:19Zen_US
dc.date.issued2011-09-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationElsayes, Khaled M.; Ellis, James H.; Elkhouly, Tohamy; Ream, Justin M.; Bowerson, Michyla; Khan, Asra; Caoili, Elaine M. (2011). "Diagnostic yield of percutaneous image‐guided tissue biopsy of focal hepatic lesions in cancer patients." Cancer 117(17): 4041-4048. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86797>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0008-543Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn1097-0142en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86797
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The diagnostic yield was evaluated of percutaneous image‐guided tissue biopsy of hepatic lesions identified on computed tomography performed for staging of a primary malignancy, and it was determined how often the biopsy result was unexpectedly negative, benign, or secondary to a second unknown malignancy. METHODS: In a retrospective investigation from 1998 through 2008, 580 patients with primary malignancies had indeterminate focal hepatic lesions and underwent percutaneous image‐guided biopsy; 369 patients had lesions in their liver at first cross‐sectional imaging, performed for staging; 211 patients had a negative liver imaging study, followed by the subsequent appearance of at least 1 indeterminate suspicious lesion. The results of percutaneous image‐guided tissue biopsies were compared with the histology of the primary malignancy. RESULTS: Liver biopsies were performed in 580 patients (288 men and 292 women; age, 25‐92 years; mean age, 61 years). The most common primary malignancies were pancreatic (n = 96), breast (n = 85), melanoma (n = 57), esophageal (n = 51), lung (n = 47), colorectal (n = 37), and urothelial tumors (n = 26). Biopsy results were positive for malignancy in 528 (91%) cases. Among the positive biopsies, 29 (5%) cases had pathology results different from the primary tumor. Of the 52 biopsies negative for malignancy, 20 yielded a specific benign diagnosis, and 32 were nondiagnostic. CONCLUSIONS: If all liver lesions had been assumed to be metastases, as expected secondary to the known primary tumor, then the true or presumed alternate diagnosis would have been missed in 60 (10.3%) of the 580 cases. The authors did not attempt to determine whether actual clinical management changed based on these 60 liver biopsy results, so this number is an upper bound on management change. On the basis of these results, and given the minimal complication rate of liver biopsy, the authors suggest that liver biopsy should still be performed in the types of cases studied here, despite the finding that the vast majority of biopsies produced the expected result and presumably did not change patient management. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society. The diagnostic yield was evaluated of percutaneous image‐guided tissue biopsy of hepatic lesions identified on computed tomography performed for staging of a primary malignancy. The authors suggest that liver biopsy should still be performed in the types of cases studied, although the vast majority of biopsies produced the expected result and presumably did not change patient management.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Companyen_US
dc.subject.otherBiopsyen_US
dc.subject.otherDiagnostic Yielden_US
dc.subject.otherHepatic Lesionsen_US
dc.subject.otherLiveren_US
dc.titleDiagnostic yield of percutaneous image‐guided tissue biopsy of focal hepatic lesions in cancer patientsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelOncology and Hematologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Healthen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texasen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Radiology, University of Banha, Banha, Egypten_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Houston, TX 77030en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21387263en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86797/1/25980_ftp.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/cncr.25980en_US
dc.identifier.sourceCanceren_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCaturelli E, Giacobbe A, Facciorusso D, et al. Percutaneous biopsy in diffuse liver disease: increasing diagnostic yield and decreasing complication rate by routine ultrasound assessment of puncture site. Am J Gastroenterol. 1996; 91: 1318 ‐ 1321.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGill DB, Rakela J, Zinsmeister AR, Ott BJ. A 21‐year experience with major hemorrhage after percutaneous liver biopsy. Gastroenterology. 1990; 99: 1396 ‐ 1400.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePiccinino F, Sagnelli E, Pasquale G, Giusti G. Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy: a multicentre retrospective study on 68,276 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1986; 2: 165 ‐ 173.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchmidt AJ, Kee ST, Sze DY, et al. Diagnostic yield of MR‐guided liver biopsies compared with CT‐ and US‐guided liver biopsies. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1999; 10: 1323 ‐ 1329.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAppelbaum L, Kane RA, Kruskal JB, Romero J, Sosna J. Focal hepatic lesions: US‐guided biopsy—lessons from review of cytologic and pathologic examination results. Radiology. 2009; 250: 453 ‐ 458.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePagani JJ. Biopsy of focal hepatic lesions. Comparison of 18 and 22 gauge needles. Radiology. 1983; 147: 673 ‐ 675.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStattaus J, Kuehl H, Ladd S, et al. CT‐guided biopsy of small liver lesions: visibility, artifacts, and corresponding diagnostic accuracy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007; 30: 928 ‐ 935.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYu SC, Liew CT, Lau WY, et al. US‐guided percutaneous biopsy of small (< or =1‐cm) hepatic lesions. Radiology. 2001; 218: 195 ‐ 199.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceElsayes KM, Leyendecker JR, Menias CO, et al. MRI characterization of 124 CT‐indeterminate focal hepatic lesions: evaluation of clinical utility. HPB (Oxford). 2007; 9: 208 ‐ 215.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTavakoli M, Davies HT, Thomson R. Decision analysis in evidence‐based decision making. J Eval Clin Pract. 2000; 6: 111 ‐ 120.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.