ArticleJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2026
Ultrasound-guided biopsy for thoracic lesions: diagnostic performance, safety, and potential role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound.
Article in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2026. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided biopsy for thoracic lesions, exploring the potential role of contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) for tissue sampling accuracy.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included 14 consecutive cases that underwent US-guided biopsy for thoracic lesions. The mean age was 68 ± 12 years (8 males, 6 females). Lesions were located in the lung (n = 3), mediastinum (n = 4), chest wall (n = 3), and rib (n = 4). Biopsies were performed using an 18- or 20-gauge core needle under B-mode and color Doppler guidance. CEUS using Sonazoid
resultsTechnical and clinical success rates were both 100% (14/14). Diagnostic accuracy was 92.8% (13/14) with a false-negative rate of 9.1% (1/11 malignant cases). Median biopsies: 2 (range: 1-4); mean procedure time: 24.0 ± 12.5 min. Diagnoses included three benign and 11 malignant lesions. One complication (7.1%) occurred: mild pneumothorax managed conservatively. This case required four biopsies due to necrotic tissue sampling. CEUS-guided cases achieved diagnosis within three biopsies without complications, with successful identification of viable tissue in all cases.
conclusionUS-guided biopsy for thoracic lesions demonstrates high success rates and safety comparable to those in the literature. In this limited series, CEUS showed potential for identifying viable tissue in cases with suspected necrosis and enabled lesion evaluation while minimizing iodinated contrast exposure in patients with renal impairment. Validation in larger studies is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42177384What 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.