1 Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Rd, Durham, NC 27710.
2 Biomedical Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019 Mar;212(3):677-685. doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20268. Epub 2019 Jan 23.
The purpose of this study was to investigate patient- and procedure-related variables affecting the false-negative rate of ultrasound (US)-guided liver biopsy and to develop a standardized patient-tailored predictive model for the management of negative biopsy results.
We retrospectively included 389 patients (mean age ± SD, 62 ± 12 years old) who had undergone US-guided liver biopsy of 405 liver lesions between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2015. We collected multiple patient- and procedure-related variables. By comparing pathology reports of biopsy and the reference standard (further histology or imaging follow-up), we were able to categorize the biopsy results as true-positive, true-negative, and false-negative. Diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic yield were measured. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify variables predicting false-negative results. A standardized patient-tailored predictive model of false-negative results based on a decision tree was fitted.
Diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic yield were 93.8% (380/405) and 89.4% (362/405), respectively. The false-negative rate was 6.5% (25/387). Predictive variables of false-negative results at univariate analysis included body mass index, lesion size, sample acquisition techniques, and immediate specimen adequacy. The only independent predictors at multivariate analysis were patient age and Charlson comorbidity index. By combining lesion size and location with patient age and history of malignancy, we developed a decision tree model that predicts false-negative results with high confidence (up to 100%).
False-negative results are not negligible at US-guided liver biopsy. The combination of selected lesion- and patient-specific variables may help predict when aggressive management is warranted in patients with likely false-negative results.
本研究旨在探讨影响超声(US)引导下肝活检假阴性率的患者和操作相关因素,并建立一种标准化的患者定制预测模型,用于管理阴性活检结果。
我们回顾性纳入了 2013 年 1 月 1 日至 2015 年 6 月 30 日期间接受 405 个肝脏病变 US 引导下肝活检的 389 例患者(平均年龄 ± 标准差,62 ± 12 岁)。我们收集了多个患者和操作相关变量。通过比较活检和参考标准(进一步的组织学或影像学随访)的病理报告,我们能够将活检结果分类为真阳性、真阴性和假阴性。测量诊断准确性和诊断率。进行单变量和多变量分析以确定预测假阴性结果的变量。根据决策树拟合基于患者定制的假阴性结果标准化预测模型。
诊断准确性和诊断率分别为 93.8%(380/405)和 89.4%(362/405)。假阴性率为 6.5%(25/387)。单变量分析中假阴性结果的预测变量包括体重指数、病变大小、样本采集技术和即时标本充分性。多变量分析中唯一的独立预测因素是患者年龄和 Charlson 合并症指数。通过将病变大小和位置与患者年龄和恶性肿瘤史相结合,我们开发了一种决策树模型,该模型可高度置信地预测假阴性结果(高达 100%)。
US 引导下肝活检的假阴性结果不容忽视。选择的病变和患者特定变量的组合可能有助于预测在可能出现假阴性结果的患者中何时需要积极治疗。