Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 53–57 | Cite as

Use of a novel percutaneous biopsy localization device: initial musculoskeletal experience

  • C. C. Roberts
  • W. B. Morrison
  • D. M. Deely
  • A. C. Zoga
  • G. Koulouris
  • C. S. Winalski
Technical Report



To preliminarily evaluate a new CT-biopsy guidance device, the SeeStar (Radi, Uppsala, Sweden), for use in musculoskeletal applications.


The device was evaluated using an imaging phantom and in various simulated clinical biopsy situations. The phantom study was undertaken to optimize the linear metallic artifacts produced by the guidance device. The phantom and guidance device were imaged with CT after altering different imaging parameters, including field of view, filter, focal spot size, kV, mAs, slice thickness and pitch. Clinical biopsy situations were simulated for a superficial biopsy, a deep biopsy and a horizontal biopsy approach.


Altering CT parameters had little effect on the subjective appearance of the linear metal artifact, which is used to plan the biopsy approach. Placement of an 18-G needle inside of the biopsy device was subjectively helpful in exaggerating the artifact. Use of this artifact could be helpful in planning biopsy approach for deep lesions or lesions near critical structures. The metal guide on the device adequately supports a standard biopsy needle, making it potentially advantageous for biopsy of superficial lesions and lesions approached from a horizontal orientation.


Use of this CT-biopsy guidance device is potentially useful for musculoskeletal applications. The linear metal artifact produced by the device can help plan the biopsy approach. The device can also be useful in biopsy situations where the biopsy needle requires external support during imaging.


Percutaneous biopsy Computed tomography Radiologic phantom 


  1. 1.
    Li H, Boiselle PM, Shepard JO, Trotman-Dickenson B, McLoud TC. Diagnostic accuracy and safety of CT-guided percutaneous needle aspiration biopsy of the lung: comparison of small and large pulmonary nodules. Am J Roentgenol 1996;167:105–9.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Whitmire LF, Galambos JT, Phillips VM et al. Imaging guided percutaneous hepatic biopsy: diagnostic accuracy and safety. J Clin Gastroenterol 1985;7:511–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Welch TJ, Sheedy PF 2nd, Johnson CD, Johnson CM, Stephens DH. CT-guided biopsy: prospective analysis of 1,000 procedures. Radiology 1989;171:493–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leffler SG, Chew FS. CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of sclerotic bone lesions: diagnostic yield and accuracy. Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:1389–92.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bernardino ME, Walther MM, Phillips VM et al. CT-guided adrenal biopsy: accuracy, safety, and indications. Am J Roentgenol 1985;144:67–9.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Loubeyre P, Copercini M, Dietrich PY. Percutaneous CT-guided multisampling core needle biopsy of thoracic lesions. Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:1294–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Olscamp A, Rollins J, Tao SS, Ebraheim NA. Complications of CT-guided biopsy of the spine and sacrum. Orthopedics 1997;20:1149–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Magnusson A, Radecka E, Lõnnemark M, Raland H. Computed-tomography-guided punctures using a new guidance device. Acta Radiol 2005;46:505–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. C. Roberts
    • 1
  • W. B. Morrison
    • 2
  • D. M. Deely
    • 2
  • A. C. Zoga
    • 2
  • G. Koulouris
    • 2
  • C. S. Winalski
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyMayo Clinic College of MedicineScottsdaleUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyThomas Jefferson University HospitalPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyBrigham & Women’s HospitalBostonUSA
  4. 4.RadiologyCleveland ClinicClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations