ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024
A novel pneumatic drill for bone biopsy under MRI imaging.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
purposeBone biopsies are currently conducted under computed tomography (CT) guidance using a battery-powered drill to obtain tissue samples for diagnosis of suspicious bone lesions. However, this procedure is suboptimal as images produced under CT lack soft tissue discrimination and involve ionizing radiation. Therefore, our team developed an MRI-safe pneumatic drill to translate this clinical workflow into the MR environment, which can improve target visualization and eliminate radiation exposure. We compare drill times and quality of samples between the 2 drills using animal bones.
methodsFive porcine spare rib bones were obtained from a butcher shop. Each bone was drilled twice using the Arrow OnControl battery-powered drill and twice using our pneumatically actuated drill. For this study, we used an 11-gauge bone biopsy needle set with an internal core capturing thread. A stopwatch recorded the overall time of drilling for each specimen obtained.
resultsAll 20 samples collected contained a high-quality inner core and cortex. The total average time for drilling with the pneumatic drill was 8.5 s (+ / - 2.5 s) and 7.1 s (+ / - 1.4 s) with the standard battery-powered drill.
conclusionBoth drills worked well and were able to obtain comparable specimens. The pneumatic drill took slightly longer, 1.39 s on average, but this extra time would not be significant in clinical practice. We plan to use the pneumatic drill to enable MRI-safe bone biopsy for musculoskeletal lesions. Biopsy under MRI would provide excellent lesion visualization with no ionizing radiation.
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.