European Radiology

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 307–312 | Cite as

MR-guided biopsies of lesions in the retroperitoneal space: technique and results

  • S. ZangosEmail author
  • K. Eichler
  • A. Wetter
  • T. Lehnert
  • R. Hammerstingl
  • T. Diebold
  • P. Reichel
  • C. Herzog
  • M.-L. Hansmann
  • M. G. Mack
  • T. J. Vogl


The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and precision of MRI-guided biopsies of retroperitoneal space-occupying tumors in an open low-field system. In 30 patients with indistinct retroperitoneal tumors [paraaortic lesion (n=20), kidney (n=2), suprarenal gland (n=3) and pancreas (n=5)] MR-guided biopsies were performed using a low-field system (0.2 T, Magnetom Concerto, Siemens, Germany). For the monitoring of the biopsies T1-weighted FLASH sequences (TR/TE=160/5 ms; 90°) were used in all patients and modified FLASH sequences (TR/TE=160/13 ms; 90°) in ten patients. After positioning of the needle in the tumors 114 biopsy specimens were acquired in coaxial technique with 16-gauge cutting needles (Somatex, Germany). The biopsies were successfully performed in all patients without vascular or organ injuries. The visualization of the aortic blood flow with MRI facilitated the biopsy procedures of paraaortic lesions. The size of the lesions ranged from 1.6 to 7.5 cm. The median distance of the biopsy access path was 10.4 cm. Adequate specimens were obtained in 28 cases (93.3%) resulting in a correct histological classification of 27 lesions (90%). In conclusion, MR-guided biopsies of retroperitoneal lesions using an open low-field system can be performed safely and accurately and is an alternative to CT-guided biopsies.


MRI-guided biopsy Retroperitoneal space Tumor biopsy 


  1. 1.
    Bellin MF, Roy C, Kinkel K et al (1998) Lymph node metastases: safety and effectiveness of MR imaging with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles-initial clinical experience. Radiology 207:799–808PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hopper K (1995) Percutaneous, radiographically guided biopsy: a history. Radiology 196:329–333PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sheafor DH, Paulson EK, Simmons CM, DeLong DM, Nelson RC (1998) Abdominal percutaneous interventional procedures: comparison of CT and US guidance. Radiology 207:705–710PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schulz T, Puccini S, Schneider J, Kahn T (2004) Interventional and intraoperative MR: review and update of techniques and clinical experience. Eur Radiol 14:2212–2227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zangos S, Kiefl D, Eichler K, Engelmann K, Heller M, Herzog C, Mack MG, Jacobi V, Vogl TJ (2003) MR-guided biopsies of undetermined liver lesions: technique and results. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 175:688–694CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sofocleous C, Schubert J, Brown K, Brody L, Covey A, Getrajdman G (2004) CT-guided transvenous or transcaval needle biopsy of pancreatic and peripancreatic lesions. J Vasc Interv Radiol 15:1099–1104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wutke R, Schmid A, Fellner F, Horbach T, Kastl S, Papadopoulos T, Hohenberger W, Bautz W (2001) CT-guided percutaneous core biopsy: effective accuracy, diagnostic utility and effective costs. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 173:1025–1033CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harisinghani MG, Saini S, Weissleder R, Hahn PF, Yantiss RK, Tempany C, Wood BJ, Mueller PR (1999) MR lymphangiography using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide in patients with primary abdominal and pelvic malignancies: radiographic-pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:1347–1351PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Matalon TA, Silver B (1990) US guidance of interventional procedures. Radiology 174:43–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Charboneau JW, Reading CC, Welch TJ (1990) CT and sonographically guided needle biopsy: current techniques and new innovations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154:1–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dupuy DE, Rosenberg AE, Punyaratabandhu T, Tan MH, Mankin HJ (1998) Accuracy of CT-guided needle biopsy of musculoskeletal neoplasms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:759–762PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zangos S, Eichler K, Engelmann K et al (2004) MR-guided transgluteal biopsies with an open low-field system in patients with clinically suspected prostate cancer: technique and preliminary results. Eur Radiol 15:174–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Adam G, Bucker A, Nolte-Ernsting C, Tacke J, Gunther RW (1999) Interventional MR imaging: percutaneous abdominal and skeletal biopsies and drainages of the abdomen. Eur Radiol 9:1471–1478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Carlson SK, Bender CE, Classic KL, Zink FE, Quam JP, Ward EM, Oberg AL (2001) Benefits and safety of CT fluoroscopy in interventional radiologic procedures. Radiology 219:515–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arellano R, Boland G, Mueller P (2000) Adrenal biopsy in a patient with lung cancer: imaging algorithm and biopsy indications, technique, and complications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:1613–1617PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Daly B, Krebs TL, Wong-You-Cheong JJ, Wang SS (1999) Percutaneous abdominal and pelvic interventional procedures using CT fluoroscopy guidance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:637–644PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Froelich JJ, Ishaque N, Saar B, Regn J, Walthers EM, Mauermann F, Klose KJ (1999) Control of percutaneous biopsy with CT fluoroscopy. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 170:191–197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Silverman SG, Tuncali K, Adams DF, Nawfel RD, Zou KH, Judy PF (1999) CT fluoroscopy-guided abdominal interventions: techniques, results, and radiation exposure. Radiology 212:673–681PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nawfel R, Judy P, Silverman S, Hooton S, Tuncali K, Adams D (2000) Patient and personnel exposure during CT fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures. Radiology 216:180–184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lufkin RB, Gronemeyer DH, Seibel RM (1997) Interventional MRI: update. Eur Radiol 7:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Konig CW, Pereira PL, Trubenbach J, Fritz J, Duda SH, Schick F, Claussen CD (2003) MR imaging-guided adrenal biopsy using an open low-field-strength scanner and MR fluoroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1567–1570PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schweiger GD, Yip VY, Brown BP (2000) CT fluoroscopic guidance for percutaneous needle placement into abdominopelvic lesions with difficult access routes. Abdom Imaging 25:633–637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Frahm C, Gehl HB, Melchert UH, Weiss HD (1996) Visualization of magnetic resonance-compatible needles at 1.5 and 0.2 Tesla. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 19:335–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ladd ME, Erhart P, Debatin JF, Romanowski BJ, Boesiger P, McKinnon GC (1996) Biopsy needle susceptibility artifacts. Magn Reson Med 36:646–651Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lewin JS, Duerk JL, Jain VR, Petersilge CA, Chao CP, Haaga JR (1996) Needle localization in MR-guided biopsy and aspiration: effects of field strength, sequence design, and magnetic field orientation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166:1337–1345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alanen J, Keski-Nisula L, Blanco-Sequeiros R, Tervonen O (2004) Cost comparison analysis of low-field (0.23 T) MRI- and CT-guided bone biopsies. Eur Radiol 14:123–128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Langen HJ, Kugel H, Ortmann M, Noack M, de Rochemont RM, Landwehr P (2001) Functional capacity of MRI-compatible biopsy needles in comparison with ferromagnetic biopsy needles. In vitro studies. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 173:658–662CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sklair-Levy M, Lebensart P, Applbaum Y et al (2001) Percutaneous image-guided needle biopsy in children-summary of our experience with 57 children. Pediatr Radiol 31:732–736CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hussain H, Kingston J, Domizio P, Norton A, Reznek R (2001) Imaging-guided core biopsy for the diagnosis of malignant tumors in pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:43–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hoffer F (2005) Interventional radiology in pediatric oncology. Eur J Radiol 53:3–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hohenberger W, Kastl S (2000) Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy of ductal pancreatic carcinoma. Zentralbl Chir 125:348–355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Demharter J, Muller P, Wagner T, Schlimok G, Haude K, Bohndorf K (2001) Percutaneous core-needle biopsy of enlarged lymph nodes in the diagnosis and subclassification of malignant lymphomas. Eur Radiol 11:276–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ghaye B, Dondelinger RF, Dewe W (1999) Percutaneous CT-guided lung biopsy: sequential versus spiral scanning. A randomized prospective study. Eur Radiol 9:1317–1320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Zangos
    • 1
    Email author
  • K. Eichler
    • 1
  • A. Wetter
    • 1
  • T. Lehnert
    • 1
  • R. Hammerstingl
    • 1
  • T. Diebold
    • 1
  • P. Reichel
    • 1
  • C. Herzog
    • 1
  • M.-L. Hansmann
    • 2
  • M. G. Mack
    • 1
  • T. J. Vogl
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyJ.W. Goethe University FrankfurtFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.Department of PathologyJ.W. Goethe University FrankfurtFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations