Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic yield and concordance of image-guided biopsy in musculoskeletal lesions

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Image-guided biopsy is well-established in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal lesions. While several studies have demonstrated a high diagnostic yield in image-guided biopsy, there are no current guidelines around procedural factors such as number of cores. Furthermore, there have been mixed results regarding which lesions are more favourable to a diagnostic biopsy. We wanted to evaluate diagnostic yield and concordance for image-guided biopsies for musculoskeletal lesions. The null hypothesis was that there are no controllable factors that contribute to positive yield.

Materials and methods

Retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent image-guided biopsy at a large teaching hospital for musculoskeletal lesions discussed at the sarcoma multi-disciplinary meeting. The formal biopsy histology report was evaluated, and biopsies were considered diagnostic or non-diagnostic. In those that had subsequent surgery (by wide excision or open biopsy), final and initial histology was compared and biopsies were considered concordant or not. Overall diagnostic yield and concordance were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed with Stata 13.0 (StataCorp).

Results

Over the 14-year period, 429 biopsies were included. Diagnostic yield was 85% and concordance was 100%. No cases of malignant lesions were initially called benign on biopsy. One biopsy had a complication (0.2%). Factors associated with higher diagnostic yield included soft tissue versus bone lesions, three or more cores and longer total specimen length. Factors that were not associated included core size, use of FNA cytology, gender, age, benign versus malignant, anatomic location and lesion appearance.

Conclusion

The null hypothesis is rejected. The main predictor of diagnostic biopsy was total specimen length, independent of number of cores taken. Three or more cores and longer cores are optimal, though these factors are influenced by lesion biology and not always able to be controlled.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wu JS, et al. Utility of repeat core needle biopsy of musculoskeletal lesions with initially nondiagnostic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(3):609–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rimondi E, et al. Percutaneous CT-guided biopsy of the musculoskeletal system: results of 2027 cases. Eur J Radiol. 2011;77(1):34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mankin HJ, Mankin CJ, Simon MA. The hazards of the biopsy, revisited. Members of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78(5):656–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Trieu J, Schlicht SM, Choong PF. Diagnosing musculoskeletal tumours: how accurate is CT-guided core needle biopsy? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42(7):1049–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim SY, Chung HW. Small musculoskeletal soft-tissue lesions: US-guided core needle biopsy–comparative study of diagnostic yields according to lesion size. Radiology. 2016;278(1):156–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nouh MR, Abu Shady HM. Initial CT-guided needle biopsy of extremity skeletal lesions: diagnostic performance and experience of a tertiary musculoskeletal center. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(2):360–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Didolkar MM, et al. Image guided core needle biopsy of musculoskeletal lesions: are nondiagnostic results clinically useful? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(11):3601–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Tsukushi S, et al. CT-guided needle biopsy for musculoskeletal lesions. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010;130(5):699–703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Omura MC, et al. Revisiting CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy of musculoskeletal lesions: contributors to biopsy success. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(2):457–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Metz T, et al. Image-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy of soft-tissue masses in the pediatric population. Pediatr Radiol. 2016;46(8):1173–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kiatisevi P, et al. Computed tomography-guided core needle biopsy versus incisional biopsy in diagnosing musculoskeletal lesions. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2013;21(2):204–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Peer S, et al. Ultrasound guided core needle biopsy of soft tissue tumors: a fool proof technique? Med Ultrason. 2011;13(3):187–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Altuntas AO, et al. Accuracy of computed tomography guided core needle biopsy of musculoskeletal tumours. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75(4):187–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dupuy DE, et al. Accuracy of CT-guided needle biopsy of musculoskeletal neoplasms. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171(3):759–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Puri A, et al. CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy in deep seated musculoskeletal lesions: a prospective study of 128 cases. Skeletal Radiol. 2006;35(3):138–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sung KS, Seo SW, Shon MS. The diagnostic value of needle biopsy for musculoskeletal lesions. Int Orthop. 2009;33(6):1701–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Hryhorczuk AL, Strouse PJ, Biermann JS. Accuracy of CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy for assessment of pediatric musculoskeletal lesions. Pediatr Radiol. 2011;41(7):848–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hao DJ, et al. Accuracy of CT-guided biopsies in 158 patients with thoracic spinal lesions. Acta Radiol. 2011;52(9):1015–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li Y, et al. Factors influencing diagnostic yield of CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy for bone lesions. Clin Radiol. 2014;69(1):e43–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ceraulo A, et al. Percutaneous guided biopsy for diagnosing suspected primary malignant bone tumors in pediatric patients: a safe, accurate, and cost-saving procedure. Pediatr Radiol. 2017;47(2):235–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ferreira F, et al. Image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy for benign and malignant bone tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2023;34(4):623-632 e2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Adams SC, et al. Office-based core needle biopsy of bone and soft tissue malignancies: an accurate alternative to open biopsy with infrequent complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(10):2774–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Iemsawatdikul K, et al. Seeding of osteosarcoma in the biopsy tract of a patient with multifocal osteosarcoma. Pediatr Radiol. 2005;35(7):717–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Seeger LL. Revisiting tract seeding and compartmental anatomy for percutaneous image-guided musculoskeletal biopsies. Skeletal Radiol. 2019;48(4):499–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wu JS, et al. Bone and soft-tissue lesions: what factors affect diagnostic yield of image-guided core-needle biopsy? Radiology. 2008;248(3):962–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gul SB, et al. Accuracy of percutaneous CT-guided spine biopsy and determinants of biopsy success. J Belg Soc Radiol. 2016;100(1):62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Ferreira FBMD, et al. Image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy for benign and malignant bone tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2023;34(4):623-632.e2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ariizumi T, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology and core needle biopsy in bone and soft tissue tumor: a comparative study of the image-guided and blindly performed procedure. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2022;59:151936.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Trieu J, et al. Biopsy and the diagnostic evaluation of musculoskeletal tumours: critical but often missed in the 21st century. ANZ J Surg. 2016;86(3):133–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yang J, et al. Analysis of nondiagnostic results after image-guided needle biopsies of musculoskeletal lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(11):3103–11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Parker SH, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy with a biopsy gun. Radiology. 1990;176(3):741–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Oldrini G, et al. Comparison of the histopathological results of the radioguided percutaneous microbiopsies and the operative specimens of soft tissue tumors of limbs, trunk and retroperitoneum. Presse Med. 2016;45(11):e363–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Saifuddin ACAW. Biopsy of bone and soft tissue sarcomas., in European Surgical Orthopaedics and Traumatology., B. G., Editor. 2014; Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. p. 3995–4016.

  34. Elliott RS, Flint M, French G. Refer prior to biopsy of suspected appendicular soft tissue sarcoma. N Z Med J. 2012;125(1366):12–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gustafson P, Dreinhofer KE, Rydholm A. Soft tissue sarcoma should be treated at a tumor center. A comparison of quality of surgery in 375 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 1994;65(1):47–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Mankin HJ, Lange TA, Spanier SS. The hazards of biopsy in patients with malignant primary bone and soft-tissue tumors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64(8):1121–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Chandrasekar CR, et al. The effect of an unplanned excision of a soft-tissue sarcoma on prognosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(2):203–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Aileen Isaac and Claire Paul from the Sarcoma Unit.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiology Department, Middlemore Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

    Hayley Wong, Gregory P. Tarr, Rahul Anand & Andrew Clarke

  2. Orthopaedics Department, Middlemore Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

    Nicola Atkinson & Michael Flint

  3. Pathology Department, Middlemore Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

    Pennie Symmans

  4. Radiology Department, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

    Anthony Doyle

Authors
  1. Hayley Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gregory P. Tarr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rahul Anand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicola Atkinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael Flint
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrew Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Pennie Symmans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Anthony Doyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hayley Wong.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

For this retrospective study formal consent was not required according to the ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wong, H., Tarr, G.P., Anand, R. et al. Diagnostic yield and concordance of image-guided biopsy in musculoskeletal lesions. Skeletal Radiol 53, 75–84 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-023-04363-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-023-04363-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation