ArticleInterventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan)2020
Computed Tomography Fluoroscopy-guided Core Needle Biopsy of Abdominal Para-aortic Lesions: A Retrospective Evaluation of the Diagnostic Yield and Safety.
Article in Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan), 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Needle Navigation Technologies in Minimally Invasive Cardiovascular Surgeries-Toward a More Effective and Easy-to-Apply Process.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Safety and accuracy of aortic and periaortic CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Article
- Computed tomography-guided lymphangiography from the para-aortic lymph node: a useful approach for chylothorax after esophagectomy.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2022Article
- Percutaneous Image-guided Needle Biopsy of Musculoskeletal Tumors: Technical Tips.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic yield and safety of computed tomography (CT) fluoroscopy-guided biopsy of abdominal para-aortic lesions. Material and Methods: CT fluoroscopy-guided biopsy was performed for 30 lesions (median long diameter 2.4 cm; range, 1.3-12.4 cm) in 30 patients (11 women and 19 men; median age 64.5 years; age range 37-90 years) using 18- and/or 20-gauge needles. The median length of the biopsy needle tracts was 9.3 cm (range, 5.5-13.0 cm). The median number of biopsy fires was 3 (range, 2-6). The median duration of the procedures was 33 min (range, 14-80 min). The diagnostic yield and adverse events (AEs) were retrospectively evaluated. The AEs were categorized using the Society of Interventional Radiology classification system. Technical success was determined by the acquisition of a sufficient number of specimens for pathological diagnosis. Diagnostic yield was defined as the match between the pathological and final diagnoses. Results: In all 30 procedures, CT fluoroscopy-guided biopsies of the abdominal para-aortic lesions were technically successful. Twenty-six lesions were malignant (9 malignant lymphomas and 17 lymph node [LN] metastases) and four were benign (one schwannoma, one granular cell tumor, and two normal LNs). One case was insufficiently diagnosed as a B-cell lymphoma; thus, the diagnostic yield of the biopsy was 96.7%. AEs occurred in seven procedures (23.3%), including six cases of class A hemorrhage and one case of class B vasovagal reaction. Conclusions: CT fluoroscopy-guided biopsy of abdominal para-aortic lesions is a safe procedure and provides a high diagnostic yield.
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.