...
首页> 外文期刊>Radiology >Fine-needle aspiration biopsy versus fine-needle capillary (nonaspiration) biopsy: in vivo comparison.
【24h】

Fine-needle aspiration biopsy versus fine-needle capillary (nonaspiration) biopsy: in vivo comparison.

机译:细针穿刺活检与细针毛细血管穿刺活检:体内比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in vivo, the efficacy of fine-needle capillary (nonaspiration) biopsy (FNCB) versus fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) when performed at the same site with a coaxial technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 91 patients, biopsy was performed at 140 sites in 93 lesions mostly throughout the chest and abdomen with either FNCB or FNAB, or both (98 sites). A coaxial technique with a 22-gauge needle was used. The quality of the specimen was graded by a blinded pathologist, who also made a pathologic diagnosis. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was noted in the graded criteria performance plus diagnostic yield between the two techniques. When performed before FNAB, FNCB yielded a better quality specimen of a particular site. However, there was no difference in the graded quality of FNAB whether performed before or after FNCB. Insufficient specimens were obtained at 30 (21.4%) of 140 sites with FNCB versus only 18 (12.8%) with FNAB. CONCLUSION: FNCB is an alternative to FNAB and provides a cellular diagnostic specimen from most lesions. When a coaxial method is used and both techniques are employed, the diagnostic accuracy of these techniques is 84%.
机译:目的:在体内,通过同轴技术在同一部位进行细针毛细血管穿刺活检(FNCB)对比细针穿刺活检(FNAB)的有效性。材料与方法:在91例患者中,对93个病变的140个部位进行了活检,这些部位大部分遍布FNCB或FNAB或两者(98个部位)在整个胸部和腹部。使用带22号针头的同轴技术。盲人病理学家对标本的质量进行了分级,他也进行了病理诊断。结果:两种技术在分级标准性能和诊断产率上均未发现统计学上的显着差异。在FNAB之前执行时,FNCB产生了特定位置的更好质量的标本。但是,无论是在FNCB之前还是之后,FNAB的分级质量都没有差异。 FNCB在140个位点中有30个(21.4%)标本不足,而FNAB只有18个(12.8%)。结论:FNCB是FNAB的替代品,可提供大多数病变的细胞诊断标本。当使用同轴方法并且同时使用两种技术时,这些技术的诊断准确性为84%。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号