ArticleSkeletal radiology2024
Diagnostic yield and concordance of image-guided biopsy in musculoskeletal lesions.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenging bone biopsies: what radiologists needs to know.Skeletal radiology · 2026Review
- Performance of image-guided bone biopsies in malignant lesions: impact of PET/CT metabolic activity on the number of samples required.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Ultrasound guided procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a narrative review with illustrative examples.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Review
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveImage-guided biopsy is well-established in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal lesions. While several studies have demonstrated a high diagnostic yield in image-guided biopsy, there are no current guidelines around procedural factors such as number of cores. Furthermore, there have been mixed results regarding which lesions are more favourable to a diagnostic biopsy. We wanted to evaluate diagnostic yield and concordance for image-guided biopsies for musculoskeletal lesions. The null hypothesis was that there are no controllable factors that contribute to positive yield. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent image-guided biopsy at a large teaching hospital for musculoskeletal lesions discussed at the sarcoma multi-disciplinary meeting. The formal biopsy histology report was evaluated, and biopsies were considered diagnostic or non-diagnostic. In those that had subsequent surgery (by wide excision or open biopsy), final and initial histology was compared and biopsies were considered concordant or not. Overall diagnostic yield and concordance were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed with Stata 13.0 (StataCorp).
resultsOver the 14-year period, 429 biopsies were included. Diagnostic yield was 85% and concordance was 100%. No cases of malignant lesions were initially called benign on biopsy. One biopsy had a complication (0.2%). Factors associated with higher diagnostic yield included soft tissue versus bone lesions, three or more cores and longer total specimen length. Factors that were not associated included core size, use of FNA cytology, gender, age, benign versus malignant, anatomic location and lesion appearance.
conclusionThe null hypothesis is rejected. The main predictor of diagnostic biopsy was total specimen length, independent of number of cores taken. Three or more cores and longer cores are optimal, though these factors are influenced by lesion biology and not always able to be controlled.
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.