Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ultrasound-guided biopsy of challenging abdominopelvic targets

  • Special Section: Cross sectional interventions
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Percutaneous ultrasound-guided biopsies have become the standard of practice for tissue diagnosis in the abdomen and pelvis for many sites including liver, kidney, abdominal wall, and peripheral nodal stations. Additional targets may appear difficult or impossible to safely biopsy by ultrasound due to interposed bowel loops/vasculature, deep positioning, association with the bowel, or concern for poor visibility; however, by optimizing technique, it is often possible to safely and efficiently use real-time ultrasound guidance for sampling targets that normally would be considered only appropriate for CT guided or surgical/endoscopic biopsy.

Graphic abstract

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Winter TC, Lee FT, Hinshaw JL. Ultrasound-guided biopsies in the abdomen and pelvis. Ultrasound Q 2008; 24:45-68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carberry GA, Lubner MG, Wells SA, Hinshaw JL. Percutaneous biopsy in the abdomen and pelvis: a step-by-step approach. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016; 41:720-742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sheafor DH, Paulson EK, Simmons CM, DeLong DM, Nelson RC. Abdominal percutaneous interventional procedures: comparison of CT and US guidance. Radiology 1998; 207:705-710

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kliewer MA, Sheafor DH, Paulson EK, Helsper RS, Hertzberg BS, Nelson RC. Percutaneous liver biopsy: a cost-benefit analysis comparing sonographic and CT guidance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173:1199-1202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Yoon SH, Lee KH, Kim SY, et al. Real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided biopsy of focal hepatic lesions not localised on B-mode ultrasound. Eur Radiol 2010; 20:2047-2056

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mao F, Dong Y, Ji Z, Cao J, Wang WP. Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Guided Biopsy of Undetermined Abdominal Lesions: A Multidisciplinary Decision-Making Approach. Biomed Res Int 2017; 2017:8791259

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang DY, Yusuf GT, Daneshi M, et al. Contrast-enhanced US-guided Interventions: Improving Success Rate and Avoiding Complications Using US Contrast Agents. Radiographics 2017; 37:652-664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. O'Shea A, Tam AL, Kilcoyne A, Flaherty KT, Lee SI. Image-guided biopsy in the age of personalised medicine: strategies for success and safety. Clin Radiol 2021; 76:154.e151-154.e159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. El-Osta H, Hong D, Wheler J, et al. Outcomes of research biopsies in phase I clinical trials: the MD anderson cancer center experience. Oncologist 2011; 16:1292-1298

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Basik M, Aguilar-Mahecha A, Rousseau C, et al. Biopsies: next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2013; 10:437-450

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hoang NS, Ge BH, Pan LY, et al. Determining the Optimal Number of Core Needle Biopsy Passes for Molecular Diagnostics. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2018; 41:489-495

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jamshidi N, Huang D, Abtin FG, et al. Genomic Adequacy from Solid Tumor Core Needle Biopsies of ex Vivo Tissue and in Vivo Lung Masses: Prospective Study. Radiology 2017; 282:903-912

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Goswami RS, Luthra R, Singh RR, et al. Identification of Factors Affecting the Success of Next-Generation Sequencing Testing in Solid Tumors. Am J Clin Pathol 2016; 145:222-237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Roy-Chowdhuri S, Chen H, Singh RR, et al. Concurrent fine needle aspirations and core needle biopsies: a comparative study of substrates for next-generation sequencing in solid organ malignancies. Mod Pathol 2017; 30:499-508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nyman RS, Cappelen-Smith J, Brismar J, von Sinner W, Kagevi I. Yield and complications in ultrasound-guided biopsy of abdominal lesions. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration biopsy and 1.2-mm needle core biopsy using an automated biopsy gun. Acta Radiol 1995; 36:485-490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Berger H, Permanetter W, Steiner W, Markl A. [Fine-needle and incisional biopsy technics in the percutaneous puncture of abdominal space-occupying lesions]. Radiologe 1988; 28:265-268

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stewart CJ, Coldewey J, Stewart IS. Comparison of fine needle aspiration cytology and needle core biopsy in the diagnosis of radiologically detected abdominal lesions. J Clin Pathol 2002; 55:93-97

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Prasad N, Kumar S, Manjunath R, et al. Real-time ultrasound-guided percutaneous renal biopsy with needle guide by nephrologists decreases post-biopsy complications. Clin Kidney J 2015; 8:151-156

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Shabana W, Kielar A, Vermani V, et al. Accuracy of sonographically guided biopsy using a freehand versus needle-guided technique: computed tomographic correlation study. J Ultrasound Med 2013; 32:535-540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Phal PM, Brooks DM, Wolfe R. Sonographically guided biopsy of focal lesions: a comparison of freehand and probe-guided techniques using a phantom. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1652-1656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bergin D, Pappas JN, Hwang JJ, Sheafor DH, Paulson EK. Echogenic polymer coating: does it improve needle visualization in sonographically guided biopsy? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:1188-1190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sheiman RG, Fey C, McNicholas M, Raptopoulos V. Possible causes of inconclusive results on CT-guided thoracic and abdominal core biopsies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:1603-1607

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Boyum JH, Atwell TD, Wall DJ, et al. Incidence of major hemorrhage after aggressive image-guided liver mass biopsy in the era of individualized medicine. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:2067-2073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Uppot RN, Sahani DV, Hahn PF, Gervais D, Mueller PR. Impact of obesity on medical imaging and image-guided intervention. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:433-440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Elissa M, Lubner MG, Pickhardt PJ. Biopsy of Deep Pelvic and Abdominal Targets With Ultrasound Guidance: Efficacy of Compression. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020; 214:194-199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nolsøe C, Nielsen L, Torp-Pedersen S, Holm HH. Major complications and deaths due to interventional ultrasonography: a review of 8000 cases. J Clin Ultrasound 1990; 18:179-184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Livraghi T, Damascelli B, Lombardi C, Spagnoli I. Risk in fine-needle abdominal biopsy. J Clin Ultrasound 1983; 11:77-81

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cherukuri AR, Lubner MG, Zea R, et al. Tissue sampling in the era of precision medicine: comparison of percutaneous biopsies performed for clinical trials or tumor genomics versus routine clinical care. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:2074-2080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Zani EL, Clark OA, Rodrigues Netto N. Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011:CD006576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Aron M, Rajeev TP, Gupta NP. Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate: a randomized controlled study. BJU Int 2000; 85:682-685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Park JJ, Kim CK, Park BK. Ultrasound-Guided Transvaginal Core Biopsy of Pelvic Masses: Feasibility, Safety, and Short-Term Follow-Up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206:877-882

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Zanetta G, Trio D, Lissoni A, et al. Early and short-term complications after US-guided puncture of gynecologic lesions: evaluation after 1,000 consecutive cases. Radiology 1993; 189:161-164

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Campbell C, Lubner MG, Hinshaw JL, Muñoz del Rio A, Brace CL. Contrast media-doped hydrodissection during thermal ablation: optimizing contrast media concentration for improved visibility on CT images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199:677-682

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Tyng CJ, Bitencourt AG, Martins EB, Pinto PN, Chojniak R. Technical note: CT-guided paravertebral adrenal biopsy using hydrodissection--a safe and technically easy approach. Br J Radiol 2012; 85:e339-342

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Weiss J, Garnon J, Cazzato RL, et al. Percutaneous hydrodissection for thermoprotection during cryoablation of periureteric and pyeloureteric junction renal cell carcinomas. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021; 46:1179-1187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Liu C, He J, Li T, Hong D, Su H, Shao H. Evaluation of the efficacy and postoperative outcomes of hydrodissection-assisted microwave ablation for subcapsular hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021; 46:2161-2172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sainani NI, Arellano RS, Shyn PB, Gervais DA, Mueller PR, Silverman SG. The challenging image-guided abdominal mass biopsy: established and emerging techniques 'if you can see it, you can biopsy it'. Abdom Imaging 2013; 38:672-696

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Akan H, Ozen N, Incesu L, Gümüş S, Güneş M. Are percutaneous transgastric biopsies using 14-, 16- and 18-G Tru-Cut needles safe? An experimental study in the rabbit. Australas Radiol 1998; 42:99-101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Fisher AJ, Paulson EK, Sheafor DH, Simmons CM, Nelson RC. Small lymph nodes of the abdomen, pelvis, and retroperitoneum: usefulness of sonographically guided biopsy. Radiology 1997; 205:185-190

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Brandt KR, Charboneau JW, Stephens DH, Welch TJ, Goellner JR. CT- and US-guided biopsy of the pancreas. Radiology 1993; 187:99-104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kim SH, Han JK, Lee KH, et al. Experimentally induced small-bowel tumor in rabbits: US-guided percutaneous 18-gauge core biopsy. Radiology 2004; 231:150-155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tudor GR, Rodgers PM, West KP. Bowel lesions: percutaneous US-guided 18-gauge needle biopsy--preliminary experience. Radiology 1999; 212:594-597

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Marco-Doménech SF, Gil-Sánchez S, Fernández-García P, et al. Sonographically guided percutaneous biopsy of gastrointestinal tract lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:147-151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Farmer KD, Harries SR, Fox BM, Maskell GF, Farrow R. Core biopsy of the bowel wall: efficacy and safety in the clinical setting. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:1627-1630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Francica G, Meloni MF, de Sio I, et al. Biopsy of Liver Target Lesions under Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Guidance - A Multi-Center Study. Ultraschall Med 2018; 39:448-453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Posielski NM, Bui A, Wells SA, et al. Risk Factors for Complications and Nondiagnostic Results following 1,155 Consecutive Percutaneous Core Renal Mass Biopsies. J Urol 2019; 201:1080-1087

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Spencer JA, Swift SE, Wilkinson N, Boon AP, Lane G, Perren TJ. Peritoneal carcinomatosis: image-guided peritoneal core biopsy for tumor type and patient care. Radiology 2001; 221:173-177

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Hill DK, Schmit GD, Moynagh MR, Nicholas Kurup A, Schmitz JJ, Atwell TD. Percutaneous omental biopsy: efficacy and complications. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:1566-1570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Vadvala HV, Furtado VF, Kambadakone A, Frenk NE, Mueller PR, Arellano RS. Image-Guided Percutaneous Omental and Mesenteric Biopsy: Assessment of Technical Success Rate and Diagnostic Yield. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2017; 28:1569-1576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Perez AA, Lubner MG, Pickhardt PJ. Ultrasound-Guided Omental Biopsy: Diagnostic Yield and Association with CT Features Based on a Single-Institution 18-Year Series. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021

  51. Que Y, Wang X, Liu Y, Li P, Ou G, Zhao W. Ultrasound-guided biopsy of greater omentum: an effective method to trace the origin of unclear ascites. Eur J Radiol 2009; 70:331-335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Lee MH, Lubner MG, Hinshaw JL, Pickhardt PJ. Ultrasound Guidance Versus CT Guidance for Peripheral Lung Biopsy: Performance According to Lesion Size and Pleural Contact. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210:W110-W117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Liao WY, Chen MZ, Chang YL, et al. US-guided transthoracic cutting biopsy for peripheral thoracic lesions less than 3 cm in diameter. Radiology 2000; 217:685-691

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Sheth S, Hamper UM, Stanley DB, Wheeler JH, Smith PA. US guidance for thoracic biopsy: a valuable alternative to CT. Radiology 1999; 210:721-726

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 2015; 313:390-397

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Tran GN, Leapman MS, Nguyen HG, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy During Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance. Eur Urol 2017; 72:275-281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Chehab MA, Brinjikji W, Copelan A, Venkatesan AM. Navigational Tools for Interventional Radiology and Interventional Oncology Applications. Semin Intervent Radiol 2015; 32:416-427

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Abi-Jaoudeh N, Kruecker J, Kadoury S, et al. Multimodality image fusion-guided procedures: technique, accuracy, and applications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2012; 35:986-998

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, E3/311 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, USA

    Edward M. Lawrence, Meghan G. Lubner, Perry J. Pickhardt & Michael P. Hartung

Authors
  1. Edward M. Lawrence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meghan G. Lubner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Perry J. Pickhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael P. Hartung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael P. Hartung.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lawrence, E.M., Lubner, M.G., Pickhardt, P.J. et al. Ultrasound-guided biopsy of challenging abdominopelvic targets. Abdom Radiol 47, 2567–2583 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03223-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03223-4

Search

Navigation