Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36355218›Full record

ArticleSkeletal radiology2023

Helical CT versus intermittent CT fluoroscopic guidance for musculoskeletal needle biopsies: impact on radiation exposure, procedure time, diagnostic yield, and adverse events.

A M Cahalane, S Habibollahi, S J Staffa, K Yang, F J Fintelmann, C Y Chang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Skeletal radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

A M CahalaneDivision of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. acahalane@mgh.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2380-5819
S HabibollahiDivision of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
S J StaffaHarvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
K YangDivision of Diagnostic Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
F J FintelmannHarvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
C Y ChangDivision of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Harvard University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USBoston Children's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveImage-guided percutaneous needle biopsies are essential in the workup of musculoskeletal (MSK) lesions. While helical CT (HCT) is well established, intermittent CT fluoroscopy (iCTF) is an increasingly used alternative. The purpose of this study is to establish whether differences in subject radiation exposure, procedure time, yield, or adverse events exist between HCT and iCTF guidance. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective cohort study included consecutive MSK needle biopsies performed on a single-CT scanner over a 12-month period at a tertiary academic center. Subject demographics, radiation dose, and outcomes were abstracted from the medical record. Comparisons between the two cohorts were performed using Student's t-test for continuous data and using Fisher's exact test for categorical data and a two-tailed p value less than 0.05 was considered significant.

resultsTwo hundred sixteen adults (115 (53.2%) females) with a mean age of 58.8 ± 18.4 years, underwent 216 biopsies (109 (50.5%) HCT guided, 107 (49.5%) iCTF guided) between June 2017 and June 2018. Dose-length product (DLP) and volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) were significantly higher for the HCT cohort (HCT 698.9 ± 400.8 mGycm vs iCTF 312.8 ± 170.8 mGycm; p < 0.005 and HCT 19.1 mGy ± 8.8 vs iCTF 6.9 mGy ± 1.5, p < 0.001). No significant difference in diagnostic yield, procedure time, or adverse event rate was identified.

conclusionFor CT-guided MSK needle biopsies, iCTF decreases subject radiation dose compared to HCT without negatively affecting outcomes. iCTF should be strongly considered by radiologists performing MSK biopsies given the reduced patient radiation exposure.

Indexed as

Image-Guided BiopsyRadiation ExposureAdultAgedBiopsy, NeedleFemaleFluoroscopyHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRetrospective StudiesTomography, Spiral ComputedTomography, X-Ray ComputedBiopsyCT fluoroscopyHelical CTMusculoskeletalRadiation dose

Identifiers

PMID36355218
OpenAlexW4308681657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.