Advertisement

La radiologia medica

, Volume 123, Issue 4, pp 254–259 | Cite as

Concordance between fine-needle aspiration and core biopsies for osseous lesions by lesion imaging appearance and CT attenuation

  • John Li
  • Zoe Weissberg
  • Thomas A. Bevilacqua
  • Gordon Yu
  • Kristy Weber
  • Ronnie Sebro
COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the concordance between fine-needle aspiration and core biopsies for osseous lesions by lesion imaging appearance and CT attenuation.

Materials and methods

Retrospective review of 215 FNAs of osseous lesions performed in conjunction with core biopsy at our institution over a 6-year period (2011–2016). FNAs were interpreted independently of core biopsies. We assessed if FNA in conjunction with core biopsy increased diagnostic accuracy compared to core biopsy alone. We also calculated the concordance between FNA and core biopsy by lesion appearance, lesion CT attenuation, lesion histology, lesion location and FNA needle gauge size.

Results

Core biopsy alone provided the diagnosis in 207/215 cases (96.3%), however, the FNA provided the diagnosis in the remaining 8/215 cases (3.7%) where the core biopsy was non-diagnostic. There were 154 (71.6%) lytic lesions, 21 (9.8%) blastic lesions, 25 (11.6%) mixed lytic and blastic lesions and 15 (7.0%) lesions that were neither lytic nor blastic. The concordance between FNA and core biopsy for lytic osseous lesions (136/154 cases, 88.3%) was statistically significantly higher than that for blastic osseous lesions (13/21 cases, 61.9%) [P = 4.2 × 10−3; 95% CI (0.02, 0.50)]. The concordance between FNA and core biopsy was higher for low-attenuation- (110/126) than high-attenuation (58/77) lesions (P = 0.028). The concordance between FNA and core biopsy was also higher for metastases (102/119 cases, 85.7%) than non-metastases (78/96, 81.3%) [P = 0.487; 95% CI (− 0.15, 0.065)]. There was no difference in the rate of concordance between FNA and core biopsy by lesion location or FNA needle gauge size (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

FNA with core biopsy increases diagnostic rate compared to core biopsy alone or FNA alone. The concordance between FNA and core biopsy is higher for lytic lesions than for blastic lesions; and higher for low-attenuation lesions than for high-attenuation lesions.

Keywords

Osseous lesions Lytic Blastic Metastases Fine-needle aspiration FNA Bone lesions CT attenuation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The article is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. This article received no funding from any agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Kim SY, Lee HS, Moon J, Kim EK, Moon HJ, Yoon JH, Kwak JY (2017) Fine-needle aspiration versus core needle biopsy for diagnosis of thyroid malignancy and neoplasm: a matched cohort study. Eur Radiol 27(2):801–811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Uzun Ç, Akkaya Z, Düşünceli Atman E, Üstüner E, Peker E, Gülpınar B, Elhan AH, Ceyhan K, Atasoy KÇ (2017) Diagnostic accuracy and safety of CT-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of pulmonary lesions with non-coaxial technique: a single center experience with 442 biopsies. Diagn Interv Radiol 23(2):137–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dong J, Ly A, Arpin R, Ahmed Q, Brachtel E (2016) Breast fine needle aspiration continues to be relevant in a large academic medical center: experience from Massachusetts General Hospital. Breast Cancer Res Treat 158(2):297–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sur YK, Kim YC, Kim JK, Lee JH, Yoo BM, Kim YB (2015) Comparison of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions. J Ultrasound Med 34(12):2163–2169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shergill U, Vitkovski T, Stoffels G, Klein M, Gimenez C, Laser A, Cocker R, Chau K, Das K (2017) Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of lytic bone lesions: an institution’s experience. Diagn Cytopathol.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.23807 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Layfield LJ, Schmidt RL, Sangle N, Crim JR (2014) Diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of biopsy in musculoskeletal lesions: a comparison of fine-needle aspiration, core, and open biopsy techniques. Diagn Cytopathol 42(6):476–486CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yu GH, Maisel J, Frank R, Pukenas BA, Sebro R, Weber K (2017) Diagnostic utility of fine-needle aspiration cytology of lesions involving bone. Diagn Cytopathol 45(7):608–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khalbuss WE, Teot LA, Monaco SE (2010) Diagnostic accuracy and limitations of fine-needle aspiration cytology of bone and soft tissue lesions: a review of 1114 cases with cytological-histological correlation. Cancer Cytopathol 118(1):24–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holmes MG, Foss E, Joseph G, Foye A, Beckett B, Motamedi D, Youngren J, Thomas GV, Huang J, Aggarwal R, Alumkal JJ, Beer TM, Small EJ, Link TM (2017) CT-guided bone biopsies in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: factors predictive of maximum tumor yield. J Vasc Interv Radiol 28(8):1073–1081CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Spritzer CE, Afonso PD, Vinson EN, Turnbull JD, Morris KK, Foye A, Madden JF, Roy Choudhury K, Febbo PG, George DJ (2013) Bone marrow biopsy: RNA isolation with expression profiling in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer—factors affecting diagnostic success. Radiology 269(3):816–823CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaur I, Handa U, Kundu R, Garg SK, Mohan H (2016) Role of fine-needle aspiration cytology and core needle biopsy in diagnosing musculoskeletal neoplasms. J Cytol 33(1):7–12CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sperandeo M, Trovato FM, Melillo N, Dimitri L, Musumeci G, Guglielmi G (2017) The role of ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in musculoskeletal diseases. Eur J Radiol 90:234–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Santini-Araujo E, Olvi LG, Muscolo DL, Velan O, Gonzalez ML, Cabrini RL (2011) Technical aspects of core needle biopsy and fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of bone lesions. Acta Cytol 55(1):100–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ayala AG, Ro JY, Fanning CV, Flores JP, Yasko AW (1995) Core needle biopsy and fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of bone and soft-tissue lesions. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 9:633–651PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yeow KM, Tan CF, Chen JS, Hsueh C (2000) Diagnostic sensitivity of ultrasound-guided needle biopsy in soft tissue masses about superficial bone lesions. J Ultrasound Med 19(12):849–855CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Layfield LJ, Dodd LG, Hirschowitz S, Crabtree SN (2010) Fine-needle aspiration of primary osseous lesions: a cost effectiveness study. Diagn Cytopathol 38(4):239–243PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Medical Radiology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Li
    • 1
  • Zoe Weissberg
    • 1
  • Thomas A. Bevilacqua
    • 1
  • Gordon Yu
    • 2
  • Kristy Weber
    • 3
  • Ronnie Sebro
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations