ArticleSkeletal radiology2021
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided musculoskeletal biopsies: our experience and technique.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- MRI Differential Diagnosis and Guidance for Puncture Biopsy of Musculoskeletal Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma and Well Differentiated Liposarcoma.Cancer management and research · 2024Article
- Comparison of Ultrasound Contrast between HDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Practical approach to ultrasound of soft tissue tumors and the added value of MRI: how I do it.Journal of ultrasonography · 2023Article
- Update of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Medicine: Clinical Perspectives - A Review.Journal of medical ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo present our experience with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)-guided musculoskeletal soft tissue biopsies in a busy interventional clinic. MATERIALS AND
methodsAfter IRB approval was obtained and informed consent was waived, we retrospectively reviewed all CEUS-guided musculoskeletal biopsies performed from December 1, 2018 to March 2, 2020. Relevant pre-procedure imaging was reviewed. Number of samples, suspected necrosis on pre-procedure imaging, specimen adequacy for pathologic analysis, correlation with pathologic diagnosis of surgical resection specimens, and procedural complications were recorded.
resultsThirty-six CEUS-guided musculoskeletal biopsies were performed in 32 patients (mean age 57, range 26-88; 22 males, 10 females). All procedures were performed using 16-gauge biopsy needles, and all procedures provided adequate samples for pathologic analysis as per the final pathology report. Between two and seven core specimens were obtained (mean 3.7). In 30/36 cases (83%), a contrast-enhanced MRI was obtained prior to biopsy, and 10/30 (33%) of these cases showed imaging features suspicious for necrosis. In 15/36 cases, surgical resection was performed, and the core biopsy and surgical resection specimens were concordant in 14/15 cases (93%). One patient noted transient leg discomfort at the time of microbubble bursting. Otherwise, no adverse reactions or procedural complications were observed.
conclusionCEUS is an accurate way to safely target representative areas of soft tissue lesions for biopsy and can be implemented in a busy interventional clinic. Our early experience has shown this to be a promising technique, especially in targeting representative areas of heterogeneous lesions and lesions with areas of suspected necrosis on prior imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.