Comparison of sonographic and CT guidance techniques: does CT fluoroscopy decrease procedure time?

Journal: AJR. American Journal Of Roentgenology
Published:
Abstract

Objective: Procedure times for percutaneous biopsies were compared for various guidance techniques including helical CT, CT fluoroscopy, sonography with an attached needle guide, and freehand sonography with computer guidance.

Methods: Three interventional radiologists experienced in CT- and sonographically guided procedures performed biopsies on a phantom model. The phantom simulated hepatic metastases of various sizes and depths with subcostal or intercostal locations. Lesion sizes were 7, 10, and 20 mm, at 3- and 7-cm depths. Using self-aspirating needles, two passes were performed in each lesion. Mean procedure time per biopsy pass was calculated. A two-tailed Student's t test was used to compare guidance techniques.

Results: Mean procedure time per biopsy pass for the four guidance techniques was sonography with a needle guide, 36+/-9 sec; sonography with computer guidance, 43+/-10 sec; helical CT, 146+/-42 sec; and CT fluoroscopy, 50+/-18 sec. CT fluoroscopy required 2.6+/-1.0 sec per biopsy. Helical CT required more procedure time than sonography with a needle guide, CT with computer guidance, and CT fluoroscopy (p < 0.0001). Sonography with a needle guide required less procedure time than sonography with computer guidance (p < 0.002) and CT fluoroscopy (p = 0.0003). Procedure times for CT fluoroscopy and sonography with computer guidance were not statistically different (p = 0.06). CT and sonographic guidance were equally effective regardless of lesion size, depth, or location.

Conclusions: Traditional sonographic biopsy techniques are faster and more cost-effective than traditional CT techniques; however, CT fluoroscopy offers the localization advantages of CT with improved procedure times.

Authors
D Sheafor, E Paulson, M Kliewer, D Delong, R Nelson