Percutaneous lung biopsies: performance of an optical CT-based navigation system with a low-dose protocol

Abstract

Objectives

To compare patients’ radiation exposure, technical feasibility, imaging quality and complication rate of percutaneous lung biopsies (PLBs) performed with a low-dose (LD) CT protocol under guidance of an optical navigation system.

Methods

Fifty-two consecutive patients with suspected malignant lung lesions were enrolled and randomised into group 1 (PLBs under the guidance of the navigation system) and group 2 (PLBs under the guidance navigation system with an LD protocol). Patients’ demographics, lesion features, procedure-related variables and CT image quality for group 2 were recorded and compared.

Results

Technical success was 100 % in both groups. The radiation dose to patients’ chest was significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 (group 1: mean TDLP 206 ± 59 mGy·cm, ~ 3.5 ± 1.0 mSv; group 2: 54.2 ± 46.2 mGy·cm, ~ 0.92 ± 0.78 mSv; P < 0.0001). The PNX rate was 12 % in group 1 and 11.1 % in group 2. The haemoptysis rate was 8.0 % in group 1 and 3.7 % in group 2. CT image quality obtained in group 2 was always rated as adequate and as excellent in 15 cases (56.0 %).

Conclusions

An optical navigation system with LD CT protocol is useful for performing lung biopsies with decreased patient radiation exposure.

Key Points

• Navigation systems are useful tools in percutaneous imaging-guided procedures.

• For lung biopsies, low-dose (LD) CT protocols may be used.

• Combining LD protocols with optical CT navigation results in significantly reduced radiation exposure.

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

Fig. 1

Abbreviations

PLBs:

Percutaneous lung biopsies

LD:

Low dose

References

  1. 1.

    Wood BJ, Zhang H, Durrani A et al (2005) Navigation with electromagnetic tracking for interventional radiology procedures: a feasibility study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 16:493–505

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Meier-Meitinger M, Nagel M, Kalender W, Bautz WA, Baum U (2008) Computer-assisted navigation system for interventional CT-guided procedures: results of phantom and clinical studies. Rofo 180:310–317

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Aghayev E, Ebert LC, Christe A et al (2008) CT data-based navigation for post-mortem biopsy-a feasibility study. J Forensic Leg Med 15:382–387

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Khan MF, Dogan S (2006) Navigation-based needle puncture of a cadaver using a hybrid tracking navigational system. Invest Radiol 41:713–720

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Wallace MJ, Gupta S, Hicks ME (2009) Out-of-plane computed tomography- guided biopsy using a magnetic-field-based navigation system. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 29:108–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Santos RS, Gupta A, Ebright MI et al (2010) Electromagnetic navigation to aid radiofrequency ablation and biopsy of lung tumors. Ann Thorac Surg 89:265–268

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Grand DJ, Atalay MA, Cronan JJ, Mayo-Smith WW, Dupuy DE (2011) CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy: comparison of conventional CT fluoroscopy to CT fluoroscopy with electromagnetic navigation system in 60 consecutive patients. Eur J Radiol 79:e133–e136

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Grasso RF, Faiella E, Luppi G et al (2013) Percutaneous lung biopsy: comparison between an augmented reality CT navigation system and standard CT-guided technique. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. doi:10.1007/s11548-013-0816-8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (1999) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography, Luxembourg

  10. 10.

    De González AB, Mahesh M, Kim KP et al (2009) Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 169:2071–2077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Sarti M, Brehmer WP, Gay SB (2012) Low-dose techniques in CT-guided interventions. Radiographics 32:1109–1119

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    De González AB, Darby S (2004) Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 363:345–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Kubo T, Lin PJ, Stiller W et al (2008) Radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a review. Am J Roentgenol 190:335–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Lucey BC, Varghese JC, Hochberg A, Blake AM, Soto JA (2007) CT-guided intervention with low radiation dose: feasibility and experience. Am J Roentgenol 188:1187–1194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Bruners P, Penzkofer T, Nagel M et al (2009) Electromagnetic tracking for CT-guided spine interventions: phantom, ex-vivo and in-vivo results. Eur Radiol 19:990–994

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Lal H, Neyaz Z, Nath A, Borah S (2012) CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of intrathoracic lesions. Korean J Radiol 13:210–226

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Choo JY, Park CM, Lee NK, Lee SM, Lee HJ, Goo GM (2013) Percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy of small (≤1 cm) lung nodules under C-arm cone-beam CT virtual navigation guidance. Eur Radiol 23:712–719

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Braak SJ, Herder GJ, van Heesewijk JPM, van Strijen MJL (2012) Pulmonary masses: initial results of cone-beam CT guidance with needle planning software for percutaneous lung biopsy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 35:1414–1421

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Itoh S, Ikeda M, Arahata S et al (2000) Lung cancer screening: minimum tube current required for helical CT. Radiology 215:175–183

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Hetmaniak Y, Bard JJ, Albuisson E et al (2003) Pulmonary nodules: dosimetric and clinical studies at low dose multidetector CT. J Radiol 84:399–404

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Zhu X, Yu J, Huang Z (2004) Low-dose chest CT: optimizing radiation protection for patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:809–816

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roberto Luigi Cazzato.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grasso, R.F., Cazzato, R.L., Luppi, G. et al. Percutaneous lung biopsies: performance of an optical CT-based navigation system with a low-dose protocol. Eur Radiol 23, 3071–3076 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2932-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Pulmonary nodules
  • Percutaneous lung biopsy
  • Computed tomography (CT)
  • Radiation dose
  • Navigation system