Liver biopsy: ultrasonography guidance is not superior to the blind method

The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with adequate liver biopsy samples and compare the complication rates of blind and US-guided biopsies, as well as to compare the histological yield of blind and US-guided biopsy specimens. We retrospectively analyzed 205 consecutive patients that...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD 2010-03, Vol.19 (1), p.49-52
Main Authors: Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha, Sezikli, Mesut, Güzelbulut, Fatih, Benek, Yusuf Ziya, Ozkara, Selvinaz, Gökden, Yasemin, Yaşar, Bülent, Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biopsy, Needle - adverse effects
Biopsy, Needle - methods
Humans
Liver - diagnostic imaging
Liver - pathology
Liver Diseases - diagnosis
Liver Diseases - diagnostic imaging
Liver Diseases - pathology
Predictive Value of Tests
Retrospective Studies
Turkey
Ultrasonography, Interventional
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 52
container_issue 1
container_start_page 49
container_title Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD
container_volume 19
creator Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha
Sezikli, Mesut
Güzelbulut, Fatih
Benek, Yusuf Ziya
Ozkara, Selvinaz
Gökden, Yasemin
Yaşar, Bülent
Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya
description The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with adequate liver biopsy samples and compare the complication rates of blind and US-guided biopsies, as well as to compare the histological yield of blind and US-guided biopsy specimens. We retrospectively analyzed 205 consecutive patients that underwent liver biopsies during a 12-month period. Liver biopsy was performed via the blind method in 152 patients, and via US-guidance in 53 patients. Biopsy specimens were evaluated according to length, presence of fragmentation, crush artifacts, adequacy for diagnosis, and the number of portal tracts and central veins. We also evaluated the rates of mortality and major life-threatening complications. All the biopsy specimens were adequate for histological evaluation, except in 8 cases, of which 4 were in the blind biopsy group (2.63%) and 4 were in the US-guided biopsy group (7.54%) (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the specimen fragmentation, or number of portal tracts and central veins in each specimen. Mean specimen length in the US-guided liver biopsy group was 12.58+/-5.59 mm, and in the blind biopsy group 16.22+/-9.91 mm (P
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733846989</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733846989</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p210t-167c5bcc085956655ff009750366ec12d838dd320db84c968e0d6d9d46c79d8b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1j8tKxDAARbNQnHH0FyQ7V4WkaV7uZPAxUnCj65JXp5G2qXkI_XsHHFdnczjcewG2WDS4ErxuNuA6pS-EGEOcX4FNjQjDiNMteGv9j4tQ-7Ck9QGWMUeVwhyOUS3DCo_FWzUbB32Cc8gwlcVFHyLMAebBQT362cLJ5SHYG3DZqzG52zN34PP56WP_WrXvL4f9Y1stNUa5wowbqo1BgkrKGKV9j5Dk9DSJOYNrK4iwltTIatEYyYRDlllpG2a4tEKTHbj_6y4xfBeXcjf5ZNw4qtmFkjpOiGiYFPJk3p3NoidnuyX6ScW1-79PfgHdQlVk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733846989</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Liver biopsy: ultrasonography guidance is not superior to the blind method</title><source>Freely Accessible Science Journals</source><creator>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha ; Sezikli, Mesut ; Güzelbulut, Fatih ; Benek, Yusuf Ziya ; Ozkara, Selvinaz ; Gökden, Yasemin ; Yaşar, Bülent ; Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</creator><creatorcontrib>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha ; Sezikli, Mesut ; Güzelbulut, Fatih ; Benek, Yusuf Ziya ; Ozkara, Selvinaz ; Gökden, Yasemin ; Yaşar, Bülent ; Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with adequate liver biopsy samples and compare the complication rates of blind and US-guided biopsies, as well as to compare the histological yield of blind and US-guided biopsy specimens. We retrospectively analyzed 205 consecutive patients that underwent liver biopsies during a 12-month period. Liver biopsy was performed via the blind method in 152 patients, and via US-guidance in 53 patients. Biopsy specimens were evaluated according to length, presence of fragmentation, crush artifacts, adequacy for diagnosis, and the number of portal tracts and central veins. We also evaluated the rates of mortality and major life-threatening complications. All the biopsy specimens were adequate for histological evaluation, except in 8 cases, of which 4 were in the blind biopsy group (2.63%) and 4 were in the US-guided biopsy group (7.54%) (P&gt;0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the specimen fragmentation, or number of portal tracts and central veins in each specimen. Mean specimen length in the US-guided liver biopsy group was 12.58+/-5.59 mm, and in the blind biopsy group 16.22+/-9.91 mm (P&lt;0.005) . There was no mortality or major complications in either of the two study groups. US-guided biopsy was not superior to blind biopsy, an unexpected result. Gastroenterologists/hepatologists should be encouraged to perform liver biopsies via the blind method.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1841-8724</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20361075</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Romania</publisher><subject>Biopsy, Needle - adverse effects ; Biopsy, Needle - methods ; Humans ; Liver - diagnostic imaging ; Liver - pathology ; Liver Diseases - diagnosis ; Liver Diseases - diagnostic imaging ; Liver Diseases - pathology ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Retrospective Studies ; Turkey ; Ultrasonography, Interventional</subject><ispartof>Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD, 2010-03, Vol.19 (1), p.49-52</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20361075$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sezikli, Mesut</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Güzelbulut, Fatih</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Benek, Yusuf Ziya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ozkara, Selvinaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gökden, Yasemin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yaşar, Bülent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</creatorcontrib><title>Liver biopsy: ultrasonography guidance is not superior to the blind method</title><title>Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD</title><addtitle>J Gastrointestin Liver Dis</addtitle><description>The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with adequate liver biopsy samples and compare the complication rates of blind and US-guided biopsies, as well as to compare the histological yield of blind and US-guided biopsy specimens. We retrospectively analyzed 205 consecutive patients that underwent liver biopsies during a 12-month period. Liver biopsy was performed via the blind method in 152 patients, and via US-guidance in 53 patients. Biopsy specimens were evaluated according to length, presence of fragmentation, crush artifacts, adequacy for diagnosis, and the number of portal tracts and central veins. We also evaluated the rates of mortality and major life-threatening complications. All the biopsy specimens were adequate for histological evaluation, except in 8 cases, of which 4 were in the blind biopsy group (2.63%) and 4 were in the US-guided biopsy group (7.54%) (P&gt;0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the specimen fragmentation, or number of portal tracts and central veins in each specimen. Mean specimen length in the US-guided liver biopsy group was 12.58+/-5.59 mm, and in the blind biopsy group 16.22+/-9.91 mm (P&lt;0.005) . There was no mortality or major complications in either of the two study groups. US-guided biopsy was not superior to blind biopsy, an unexpected result. Gastroenterologists/hepatologists should be encouraged to perform liver biopsies via the blind method.</description><subject>Biopsy, Needle - adverse effects</subject><subject>Biopsy, Needle - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Liver - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Liver - pathology</subject><subject>Liver Diseases - diagnosis</subject><subject>Liver Diseases - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Liver Diseases - pathology</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Turkey</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Interventional</subject><issn>1841-8724</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo1j8tKxDAARbNQnHH0FyQ7V4WkaV7uZPAxUnCj65JXp5G2qXkI_XsHHFdnczjcewG2WDS4ErxuNuA6pS-EGEOcX4FNjQjDiNMteGv9j4tQ-7Ck9QGWMUeVwhyOUS3DCo_FWzUbB32Cc8gwlcVFHyLMAebBQT362cLJ5SHYG3DZqzG52zN34PP56WP_WrXvL4f9Y1stNUa5wowbqo1BgkrKGKV9j5Dk9DSJOYNrK4iwltTIatEYyYRDlllpG2a4tEKTHbj_6y4xfBeXcjf5ZNw4qtmFkjpOiGiYFPJk3p3NoidnuyX6ScW1-79PfgHdQlVk</recordid><startdate>20100301</startdate><enddate>20100301</enddate><creator>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha</creator><creator>Sezikli, Mesut</creator><creator>Güzelbulut, Fatih</creator><creator>Benek, Yusuf Ziya</creator><creator>Ozkara, Selvinaz</creator><creator>Gökden, Yasemin</creator><creator>Yaşar, Bülent</creator><creator>Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100301</creationdate><title>Liver biopsy: ultrasonography guidance is not superior to the blind method</title><author>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha ; Sezikli, Mesut ; Güzelbulut, Fatih ; Benek, Yusuf Ziya ; Ozkara, Selvinaz ; Gökden, Yasemin ; Yaşar, Bülent ; Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p210t-167c5bcc085956655ff009750366ec12d838dd320db84c968e0d6d9d46c79d8b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Biopsy, Needle - adverse effects</topic><topic>Biopsy, Needle - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Liver - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Liver - pathology</topic><topic>Liver Diseases - diagnosis</topic><topic>Liver Diseases - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Liver Diseases - pathology</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Turkey</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Interventional</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sezikli, Mesut</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Güzelbulut, Fatih</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Benek, Yusuf Ziya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ozkara, Selvinaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gökden, Yasemin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yaşar, Bülent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Akkan Cetinkaya, Züleyha</au><au>Sezikli, Mesut</au><au>Güzelbulut, Fatih</au><au>Benek, Yusuf Ziya</au><au>Ozkara, Selvinaz</au><au>Gökden, Yasemin</au><au>Yaşar, Bülent</au><au>Ovünç Kurdaş, Oya</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Liver biopsy: ultrasonography guidance is not superior to the blind method</atitle><jtitle>Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD</jtitle><addtitle>J Gastrointestin Liver Dis</addtitle><date>2010-03-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>49</spage><epage>52</epage><pages>49-52</pages><issn>1841-8724</issn><abstract>The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with adequate liver biopsy samples and compare the complication rates of blind and US-guided biopsies, as well as to compare the histological yield of blind and US-guided biopsy specimens. We retrospectively analyzed 205 consecutive patients that underwent liver biopsies during a 12-month period. Liver biopsy was performed via the blind method in 152 patients, and via US-guidance in 53 patients. Biopsy specimens were evaluated according to length, presence of fragmentation, crush artifacts, adequacy for diagnosis, and the number of portal tracts and central veins. We also evaluated the rates of mortality and major life-threatening complications. All the biopsy specimens were adequate for histological evaluation, except in 8 cases, of which 4 were in the blind biopsy group (2.63%) and 4 were in the US-guided biopsy group (7.54%) (P&gt;0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the specimen fragmentation, or number of portal tracts and central veins in each specimen. Mean specimen length in the US-guided liver biopsy group was 12.58+/-5.59 mm, and in the blind biopsy group 16.22+/-9.91 mm (P&lt;0.005) . There was no mortality or major complications in either of the two study groups. US-guided biopsy was not superior to blind biopsy, an unexpected result. Gastroenterologists/hepatologists should be encouraged to perform liver biopsies via the blind method.</abstract><cop>Romania</cop><pmid>20361075</pmid><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1841-8724
ispartof Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD, 2010-03, Vol.19 (1), p.49-52
issn 1841-8724
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733846989
source Freely Accessible Science Journals
subjects Biopsy, Needle - adverse effects
Biopsy, Needle - methods
Humans
Liver - diagnostic imaging
Liver - pathology
Liver Diseases - diagnosis
Liver Diseases - diagnostic imaging
Liver Diseases - pathology
Predictive Value of Tests
Retrospective Studies
Turkey
Ultrasonography, Interventional
title Liver biopsy: ultrasonography guidance is not superior to the blind method
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T17%3A15%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Liver%20biopsy:%20ultrasonography%20guidance%20is%20not%20superior%20to%20the%20blind%20method&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20gastrointestinal%20and%20liver%20diseases%20:%20JGLD&rft.au=Akkan%20Cetinkaya,%20Z%C3%BCleyha&rft.date=2010-03-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=49&rft.epage=52&rft.pages=49-52&rft.issn=1841-8724&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E733846989%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p210t-167c5bcc085956655ff009750366ec12d838dd320db84c968e0d6d9d46c79d8b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733846989&rft_id=info:pmid/20361075&rfr_iscdi=true