A retrospective study compares accuracy and complications of CT-guided and freehand lung biopsies, suggesting benefits of guidance device use.
Introduction This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate and compare the accuracy, complication rate, and feasibility of computed tomography (CT)-guided introducer-assisted percutaneous lung biopsy with those of freehand percutaneous lung biopsy for the diagnosis of pulmonary nodules ≤ 2 cm. Methods We retrospectively analysed clinical data of 307 patients with pulmonary nodules ≤ 2 cm who underwent percutaneous lung biopsy between January 2015 and August 2024. The patients were divided into two groups: A, 153 patients undergoing freehand puncture, and B, 154 patients in whom the procedure was assisted by a guidance device. A statistical analysis was performed to assess the success rate, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rate of the two techniques and to evaluate the feasibility of using a guide device-assisted puncture biopsy for small pulmonary nodules. Results All 307 patients successfully completed the percutaneous biopsy procedure (100% technical success rate). Diagnostic accuracy was 95.4% and 96.8% in Groups A and B, respectively ( p = .161). Groups A and B required an average of 9.04 ± 2.58 and 8.14 ± 1.72 intraoperative CT scans, respectively ( p < .001). Mean procedural durations for Groups A and B were 12.77 ± 4.51 and 10.83 ± 2.51 min, respectively ( p < .001). In Groups A and B, the immediate need for closed thoracic drainage was 4.6% (7/153) and 1.9% (3/154), respectively ( p = .165), and incidence of haemoptysis was 10.5% (16/153) and 9.7% (15/154), respectively ( p = .492). Neither group experienced complications such as air embolism or needle tract seeding metastasis. Conclusion Both CT-guided needle biopsy performed using a guidance device and freehand biopsy demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for pulmonary nodules ≤ 2 cm. Procedures conducted with a guidance device contributed to shorter operation times, fewer CT scans, and lower radiation exposure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: