Ultrasound versus computed tomography-guided transthoracic biopsy for pleural and peripheral lung lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

An accurate diagnosis of peripheral lung and pleural lesions using image-guided transthoracic biopsy procedure becomes a good diagnostic performance protocol.

PURPOSE

To examine the difference between ultrasonography (USG)-guided versus computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic biopsy for pleural and peripheral lung lesions by pooling data from published studies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for comparative studies up to 20 February 2023 irrespective of the language of publication. The outcomes were adequacy of the sample and complications (pneumothorax and hemothorax).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and eight non-RCTs were eligible. The total sample size was 1618. Meta-analysis showed that there was no difference in the adequacy of the sample obtained by USG- or CT-guided biopsies; however, an analysis of only non-RCTs indicated better adequacy with USG. On pooled analysis of any pneumothorax, there was a lower risk associated with USG-guided biopsies, but the risk of pneumothorax requiring interventional treatment was not different in the two groups. Similarly, the pooled analysis also demonstrated a reduced risk of hemothorax with USG-guided biopsies.

CONCLUSION

While there seems to be no difference in the adequacy of the sample obtained with either imaging modality, retrospective data show that USG guidance offers better diagnostic yield compared to CT guidance for peripheral lung and pleural biopsies. The risk of pneumothorax and hemothorax is also significantly lower with USG-guided biopsies. Results should be interpreted with caution owing to selection bias among studies. There is a need for large-scale RCTs to enhance current evidence.