Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Percutaneous Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Coaxial Cutting Needle Biopsy of Pancreatic Lesions: Diagnostic Accuracy and Safety

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Non-Vascular Interventions
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

  • 1 Altmetric

Abstract

Purpose

To appraise the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging-guided percutaneous coaxial cutting needle biopsy of pancreatic lesions using a 0.4-T open magnetic resonance imaging scanner with optical tracking navigation.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 158 patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging-guided pancreatic lesion biopsy procedures from May 2019 to December 2020. Two to four specimens were collected from each patient. Pathological diagnosis and clinical follow-ups were conducted to establish the final diagnosis. The procedures were evaluated for sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, diagnostic accuracy, and complications. The Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe guidelines were used to classify complications.

Results

Biopsy pathology revealed 139 pancreatic tumor malignancies and 19 benign pancreatic lesions. Finally, 151 patients were diagnosed with pancreatic malignancy and 7 with benign disease confirmed by surgery, re-biopsy, and clinical follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and accuracy for diagnosis of pancreatic diseases were 92.1%, 100%, 100%, 36.8%, and 92.4%, respectively. The biopsy accuracy was significantly related to the size (≤ 2 cm, 76.2%; 2–4 cm, 94.0%; > 4 cm, 96.2%, P = .02) and not the lesion's location (head of pancreas, 90.7%; neck of pancreas, 88.9%; body of pancreas, 94.3%; tail of pancreas, 96.7%, P = .73). Minor complications included two patients experiencing mild abdominal pain and two with a minor occurrence of hemorrhage.

Conclusions

Percutaneous magnetic resonance imaging-guided pancreatic lesion biopsy combined with optical navigation has high diagnostic accuracy and is safe for clinical practice.

Level of Evidence Level 4, Case-series.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Le Grazie M, Conti Bellocchi MC, Bernardoni L, et al. Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions after inconclusive percutaneous ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2020;55(9):1108–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Xin Y, Yang Y, Chen Y, Wang Y, Cao XJ, Zhou X. Safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided percutaneous coaxial core biopsy of pancreatic lesions: a retrospective study. J Ultrasound. 2021;24(3):269–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Su YY, Liu YS, Chao YJ, Chiang NJ, Yen CJ, Tsai HM. Percutaneous computed tomography-guided coaxial core biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. J Clin Med. 2019;8(10)

  4. Liu C, Wang L, He X, et al. 1.0T MR-guided percutaneous coaxial cutting needle biopsy in pancreatic lesion diagnosis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;48(2):382–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Okasha HH, Naga MI, Esmat S, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration versus percutaneous ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses. Endosc Ultrasound. 2013;2(4):190–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Sugiura R, Kuwatani M, Hirata K, et al. Effect of pancreatic mass size on clinical outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. Dig Dis Sci. 2019;64(7):2006–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang L, Sanagapalli S, Stoita A. Challenges in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(19):2047–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Huang Y, Shi J, Chen YY, Li K. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic disease. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018;44(6):1145–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Clasen S, Rempp H, Boss A, et al. MR-guided radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term effectiveness. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;22(6):762–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. He X, Liu M, Liu C, et al. Real-time MR-guided brain biopsy using 1.0-T open MRI scanner. Eur Radiol. 2019;29(1):85–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu S, Ren R, Liu M, Lv Y, Li B, Li C. MR imaging-guided percutaneous cryotherapy for lung tumors: initial experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25(9):1456–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cazzato RL, De Marini P, Auloge P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and safety of percutaneous MRI-guided biopsy of solid renal masses: single-center results after 4.5 years. Eur Radiol. 2021;31(2):580–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu M, Sequeiros RB, Xu Y, et al. MRI-guided percutaneous transpedicular biopsy of thoracic and lumbar spine using a 0.23t scanner with optical instrument tracking. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42(6):1740–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Garnon J, Ramamurthy N, Caudrelier JJ, et al. MRI-guided percutaneous biopsy of mediastinal masses using a large bore magnet: technical feasibility. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(5):761–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Das CJ, Goenka AH, Srivastava DN. MR-guided abdominal biopsy using a 1.5-Tesla closed system: a feasibility study. Abdom Imaging. 2010;35(2):218–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Filippiadis DK, Binkert C, Pellerin O, Hoffmann RT, Krajina A, Pereira PL. Cirse quality assurance document and standards for classification of complications: the cirse classification system. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017;40(8):1141–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kariniemi J, Blanco Sequeiros R, Ojala R, Tervonen O. MRI-guided abdominal biopsy in a 0.23-T open-configuration MRI system. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(6):1256–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zangos S, Eichler K, Wetter A, et al. MR-guided biopsies of lesions in the retroperitoneal space: technique and results. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(2):307–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kahriman G, Ozcan N, Dogan S, Ozmen S, Deniz K. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: results in 250 patients. J Clin Ultrasound. 2016;44(8):470–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hartwig W, Schneider L, Diener MK, Bergmann F, Büchler MW, Werner J. Preoperative tissue diagnosis for tumours of the pancreas. Br J Surg. 2009;96(1):5–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hsu MY, Pan KT, Chen CM, et al. CT-guided percutaneous core-needle biopsy of pancreatic masses: comparison of the standard mesenteric/retroperitoneal versus the trans-organ approaches. Clin Radiol. 2016;71(6):507–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Stella SF, Van Borsel M, Markose G, Nair SB. Image-guided percutaneous biopsy for pancreatic lesions: 10-year experience in a tertiary cancer center. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2019;70(2):199–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gui Y, Dai M, Meng Z, et al. Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound combined with percutaneous ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Chin Med J (Engl). 2021;135(4):426–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Mengqi Yan for her excellent technical support.

Funding

This work was supported by Shanghai Science and Technology Innovation Fund (19441907000).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Interventional Oncology, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 160 Pujian Road, Shanghai, 200127, China

    Fangqin Zhang, Guangxin Jin, Mengjun Dai, Min Ding, Jie Zhang & Xuebin Zhang

Authors
  1. Fangqin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guangxin Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mengjun Dai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Min Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jie Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xuebin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Xuebin Zhang, Fangqin Zhang, Guangxin Jin, Min Ding, Mengjun Dai, and Jie Zhang. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Fangqin Zhang, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. Fangqin Zhang and Guangxin Jin contributed equally to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xuebin Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Consent for Publication

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Ethical Approval

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

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

Zhang, F., Jin, G., Dai, M. et al. Percutaneous Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Coaxial Cutting Needle Biopsy of Pancreatic Lesions: Diagnostic Accuracy and Safety. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 46, 1603–1609 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-023-03485-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-023-03485-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation