Suppr超能文献

俯卧位与直立位数字断层融合引导活检。

Prone Versus Upright Digital Tomosynthesis-Guided Biopsy.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905.

Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

出版信息

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Sep;215(3):760-764. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.22735. Epub 2020 Jul 1.

Abstract

The objective of our study was to compare the performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT)-guided prone and upright breast biopsies. In this retrospective study, we reviewed all consecutive DBT-guided breast biopsies performed at our institution from May 1, 2018, to July 31, 2019. We recorded patient age, breast density, biopsy indications and technique, number of samples obtained, number of exposures performed, procedure times, percentage of calcifications removed, biopsy complications, histopathologic diagnosis, and radiology-pathology concordance. These characteristics were then compared between biopsy methods using the chi-square test or Wilcoxon rank sum test. There were 282 patients in our study: 215 patients (76.2%) underwent prone DBT-guided biopsy, and 67 (23.8%) underwent upright DBT-guided biopsy. All patients (100%) had technically successfully biopsies. The mean number of exposures for upright biopsies was significantly lower than the mean number of exposures for prone biopsies ( < 0.001). Otherwise, there was no significant difference between the two biopsy methods in the mean number of samples acquired ( = 0.26), mean procedure time ( = 0.67), percentage of calcifications removed ( = 0.31), or biopsy complications ( = 0.56). Besides the mean number of exposures acquired, prone and upright DBT-guided biopsies have similar clinical performance. Other factors, such as room utilization and patient comfort, should be considered when deciding between prone and upright DBT-guided biopsies.

摘要

我们的研究目的是比较数字乳腺断层合成摄影术(DBT)引导下俯卧位和仰卧位乳腺活检的性能。在这项回顾性研究中,我们回顾了 2018 年 5 月 1 日至 2019 年 7 月 31 日期间在我们机构进行的所有连续 DBT 引导下乳腺活检。我们记录了患者年龄、乳房密度、活检指征和技术、获得的样本数量、进行的曝光数量、手术时间、去除的钙化百分比、活检并发症、组织病理学诊断和放射科-病理学一致性。然后使用卡方检验或 Wilcoxon 秩和检验比较两种活检方法之间的这些特征。我们的研究中有 282 名患者:215 名患者(76.2%)接受俯卧位 DBT 引导活检,67 名患者(23.8%)接受仰卧位 DBT 引导活检。所有患者(100%)的活检均技术成功。仰卧位活检的平均曝光次数明显低于俯卧位活检的平均曝光次数(<0.001)。否则,两种活检方法在获得的样本数量平均值(=0.26)、手术时间平均值(=0.67)、去除的钙化百分比平均值(=0.31)或活检并发症平均值(=0.56)方面均无显著差异。除了获得的平均曝光次数外,俯卧位和仰卧位 DBT 引导活检具有相似的临床性能。在决定俯卧位和仰卧位 DBT 引导活检之间时,还应考虑其他因素,如房间利用率和患者舒适度。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验