Efficacy of Shadow-Based Needle Positioning System in Performing CT Image-Guided Percutaneous Biopsy of Lung Lesions: Our Initial Experience

Abstract

Context Computerized tomography (CT) is widely used for various interventions and there is a need for an effective navigation tool, for best outcomes.

Aim The study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of light- and shadow-based needle positioning assistance device, an innovative navigation tool over the conventional freehand technique, in performing CT image-guided percutaneous interventions.

Settings and Design This randomized control trial was performed among patients undergoing CT-guided percutaneous intervention for lung pathologies.

Methodology A total of 60 participants were randomized into an intervention group and a control group. The accuracy of needle insertion and other efficacy parameters were assessed for both groups. Post needle placement, CT images were used to evaluate the study endpoints.

Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS ver. 20 software.

Results The mean needle positioning accuracy was 2.1 mm in the experimental group compared with 7.2 mm in the control group freehand procedures. The average time to position the needle at the desired target location was 2.5 minutes in the assisted procedure as compared with 5.3 minutes in the freehand procedure (p < 0.05). The total number of check scans required to position the needle was 1.3 for assisted procedures and 1.9 for freehand procedures.

Conclusion The use of shadow-based assistance device for CT-guided interventions is proven to be efficient and safer with high needle positioning accuracy.

Keywords

biopsy - CT-guided intervention - lung - radiation exposure

Ethical Approval and Informed Consent

The investigation was performed following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975. Approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committee prior to the commencement of the study (Reference number: 11370 (DIAGNO) Dated: 27.06.18). Each participant was explained in detail about the study and informed consent was obtained prior to the data collection.

Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
27. April 2022

• References

• 1 Gupta R, Walsh C, Wang IS, Kachelrieß M, Kuntz J, Bartling S. CT-guided interventions: current practice and future directions. In: Jolesz F. ed. Intraoperative Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy. Springer; New York, NY: 2014
• 2 Chehab MA, Brinjikji W, Copelan A, Venkatesan AM. Navigation tools for interventional radiology and interventional oncology applications. Semin Intervent Radiol 2015; 32 (04) 416-427
• 3 International Agency for Research on Cancer. World Health Organization. Latest global cancer data: Cancer burden rises to 18.1 million new cases and 9.6 million cancer deaths in 2018. [Internet] [Last accessed on 2021 Feb 05] from: https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/pr263_E.pdf
• 4 World Health Organization. Early cancer diagnosis saves lives, cuts treatment costs. [Internet] [Last accessed on 2021 Feb 05] from: https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/03–02–2017-early-cancer-diagnosis-saves-lives-cuts-treatment-costs
• 5 Brabrand K, Aaløkken TM, Krombach GA. et al. Multicenter evaluation of a new laser guidance system for computed tomography intervention. Acta Radiol 2004; 45 (03) 308-312
• 6 Koethe Y, Xu S, Velusamy G, Wood BJ, Venkatesan AM. Accuracy and efficacy of percutaneous biopsy and ablation using robotic assistance under computed tomography guidance: a phantom study. Eur Radiol 2014; 24 (03) 723-730
• 7 Bhattacharji P, Moore W. Application of real time 3-D navigation system in CT guided percutaneous interventional procedures: a feasibility study. Radiol Res Pract 2017; 2017: 3151694
• 8 Honganoor VV, Kumar SN, Moses V, Ahmed M. CT guided biopsy using additional laser guidance: case series from India comparing with conventional free hand technique. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 2016; 47: 493-499