Froelich J J, Ishaque N, Saar B, Regn J, Walthers E M, Mauermann F, Klose K J
Abt. für Strahlendiagnostik Klinikum der Philipps-Universität, Marburg.
Rofo. 1999 Feb;170(2):191-7.
Clinical evaluation of CT fluoroscopy and comparison with conventional CT guidance for monitoring of non-pulmonary percutaneous biopsy procedures.
20 non-pulmonary CT-guided biopsy procedures were prospectively performed either with CT fluoroscopy or with conventional CT guidance. CT fluoroscopy was performed using 120 kV and 50, 70 or 90 mA at a frame-rate of three or six images per second. Number of punctures and biopsies, procedure times, radiation doses and histologic results were analyzed separately for conventional CT guidance and for CT fluoroscopy.
With CT fluoroscopy, yield of biopsies was improved (p = 0.005, t-test) and procedure times were shorter than for conventional CT guidance (11.4 +/- 6.0 vs. 23.6 +/- 13.8 min; p = 0.03, t-test). Analysis of procedure related radiation exposure and histologic outcome showed no significant difference between conventional and fluoroscopic CT-guided procedures (p > 0.05, t-test).
CT fluoroscopy facilitates guidance of percutaneous biopsy procedures. Compared to conventional CT assistance, procedure times are decreased while yield of biopsies is improved.
对CT透视技术进行临床评估,并与传统CT引导技术在非肺部经皮活检操作监测中的应用进行比较。
前瞻性地对20例非肺部CT引导活检操作分别采用CT透视技术或传统CT引导技术进行。CT透视技术采用120 kV和50、70或90 mA,每秒采集3幅或6幅图像。分别对传统CT引导组和CT透视技术组的穿刺及活检次数、操作时间、辐射剂量和组织学结果进行分析。
采用CT透视技术时,活检成功率提高(p = 0.005,t检验),操作时间比传统CT引导技术短(11.4 ± 6.0 vs. 23.6 ± 13.8分钟;p = 0.03,t检验)。对操作相关辐射暴露和组织学结果的分析显示,传统CT引导组和CT透视技术引导组之间无显著差异(p > 0.05,t检验)。
CT透视技术有助于经皮活检操作的引导。与传统CT辅助相比,操作时间缩短,活检成功率提高。