CT fluoroscopy-guided cutting needle biopsy of focal pure ground-glass opacity lung lesions: Diagnostic yield in 83 lesions

ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to retrospectively determine the diagnostic yield of CT fluoroscopy-guided cutting needle biopsy of focal pure ground-glass opacity lung lesions.Materials and methodsBiopsies were performed using 20-G coaxial cutting needles for 83 focal pure ground-glass opacity lung lesions (mean lesion size, 12.1 mm). After excluding the lesions for which biopsy specimens were unobtainable and final diagnoses were undetermined, the diagnostic yield, including sensitivity and specificity for a diagnosis of malignancy and accuracy, was calculated. The lesions were then divided into 2 groups: the diagnostic failure group, comprising lesions with false-negative results and for which a biopsy specimen was unobtainable; and the diagnostic success group, comprising lesions with true-negative results and true-positive results. Various variables were compared between the 2 groups by univariate analysis.ResultsBiopsy specimens were obtained from 82 lesions, while specimens could not be obtained from 1 lesion. Final diagnosis was undetermined in 16 lesions. The sensitivity and specificity for a diagnosis of malignancy were 95% (58/61) and 100% (5/5), respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was 95% (63/66). The 4 lesions in diagnostic failure group were smaller, deeper, and more likely to be located in the lower lobe and further, for those lesions, number of specimens obtained was smaller, compared with 63 lesions in diagnostic success group. However, none of the differences were statistically significant.ConclusionCT fluoroscopy-guided cutting needle biopsy provided high diagnostic yield for focal pure ground-glass opacity lung lesions.

Research highlights▶ I would like to add the following sentence at the end of the paragraph in the section 2.4 statistical analysis: A P value of < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. ▶ The lines in Table 3 are out of alignment. Please align them correctly. ▶ In Table 4, three data on Lesion depth in diagnostic failure group and a P value were revealed to be incorrect. I correct them. Please see Table 4.