Background: Diagnostic yield (DY) and safety of computed tomography (CT)- A nd thoracic ultrasound (TUS)-guided biopsies in the diagnosis of pleural lesions have been investigated in a number of studies, but no synthesis of data from the literature has ever been performed. Objectives: We aimed to provide the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the DY and safety of CT-versus TUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pleural lesions. Method: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for all studies reporting outcomes of interest published up to April 2018. Two authors reviewed all titles/abstracts and retrieved selected full text to identify studies according to predefined selection criteria. Summary estimates were derived using the random-effects model. Cumulative meta-analysis assessed the influence of increasing adoption of the procedures over time. Results: Thirty original studies were included in the present review; the number of studies on TUS-guided biopsy was almost three-fold higher than those on CT-guided biopsy. The pooled DYs of the 2 procedures were overall excellent and differed <10%, being 84% for TUS-guided biopsy and 93% for CT-guided biopsy. Safety profiles were reassuring for both the techniques, being 7 and 3% for CT- A nd TUS-guided biopsy, respectively. DY of ultrasound technique significantly improved over time, while no time effect was observed for CT-guided biopsy. Conclusions: Data show that CT- A nd TUS-guided biopsies in the diagnosis of pleural lesions are both excellent procedures, without meaningful differences in DYs and safety. Considering that TUS is non-ionizing and easily performed at the bedside, it should be the preferred approach in presence of adequate skills.

Diagnostic Yield and Safety of Image-Guided Pleural Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rota M.;
2021-01-01

Abstract

Background: Diagnostic yield (DY) and safety of computed tomography (CT)- A nd thoracic ultrasound (TUS)-guided biopsies in the diagnosis of pleural lesions have been investigated in a number of studies, but no synthesis of data from the literature has ever been performed. Objectives: We aimed to provide the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the DY and safety of CT-versus TUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pleural lesions. Method: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for all studies reporting outcomes of interest published up to April 2018. Two authors reviewed all titles/abstracts and retrieved selected full text to identify studies according to predefined selection criteria. Summary estimates were derived using the random-effects model. Cumulative meta-analysis assessed the influence of increasing adoption of the procedures over time. Results: Thirty original studies were included in the present review; the number of studies on TUS-guided biopsy was almost three-fold higher than those on CT-guided biopsy. The pooled DYs of the 2 procedures were overall excellent and differed <10%, being 84% for TUS-guided biopsy and 93% for CT-guided biopsy. Safety profiles were reassuring for both the techniques, being 7 and 3% for CT- A nd TUS-guided biopsy, respectively. DY of ultrasound technique significantly improved over time, while no time effect was observed for CT-guided biopsy. Conclusions: Data show that CT- A nd TUS-guided biopsies in the diagnosis of pleural lesions are both excellent procedures, without meaningful differences in DYs and safety. Considering that TUS is non-ionizing and easily performed at the bedside, it should be the preferred approach in presence of adequate skills.
2021
2020
LS4_8 Non-communicable diseases (except for neural/psychiatric, immunity-related, metabolism-related disorders, cancer and cardiovascular diseases)
LS7_10 Public health and epidemiology
LS7_2 Diagnostic tools (e.g. genetic, imaging)
Esperti anonimi
Inglese
Internazionale
STAMPA
100
1
77
87
11
Computed tomography-guided biopsy; Mesothelioma; Meta-analysis; Pleural diseases; Ultrasound-guided biopsy
https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/511626
Not applicable
11
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
262
Mei, F.; Bonifazi, M.; Rota, M.; Cirilli, L.; Grilli, M.; Duranti, C.; Zuccatosta, L.; Bedawi, E. O.; Mccracken, D.; Gasparini, S.; Rahman, N. M....espandi
1 Contributo su Rivista::1.1 Articolo in rivista
restricted
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Mei Respiration 2021 100 77–87.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Full Text
Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 560.88 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
560.88 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/539718
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 29
  • Scopus 62
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 63
social impact