Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 695-701

Computed tomography-guided lung biopsy: A meta-analysis of low-dose and standard-dose protocols

1 Department of Oncology, Binzhou People's Hospital, Binzhou, China
2 Department of Radiology, Xuzhou Central Hospital, Xuzhou, China
3 Department of Interventional Vascular Surgery, Binzhou People's Hospital, Binzhou, China

Correspondence Address:
Rong Hua
Xuzhou Central Hospital, 199 South Jiefang Road, Xuzhou 221009
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_1274_20

Rights and Permissions

Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the relative diagnostic utility of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and standard-dose computed tomography (SDCT)-guided lung biopsy approaches. Materials and Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies published through August 2020. Data pertaining to endpoints including technical success, diagnostic performance, operative time, radiation dose, and complications, were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan v5.3. Results: Three retrospective analyses and three randomized controlled trials, were included. The studies included 1977 lung lesions across 1927 patients who underwent LDCT-guided lung biopsy, and 887 lung lesions across 879 patients who underwent SDCT-guided lung biopsy. No significant differences were observed between these LDCT and SDCT groups with respect to the rates of technical success (99.0% vs. 99.5%, odds ratio [OR]: 1.82, P = 0.35,), diagnostic yield (79.6% vs. 76.2%, OR: 0.93, P = 0.47), diagnostic accuracy (96.1% vs. 96.1%, OR: 0.93, P = 0.69), operative time (mean difference [MD]: 1.04, P = 0.30), pneumothorax (19.9% vs. 21.3%, OR: 0.92, P = 0.43) or hemoptysis (4.6% vs. 5.8%, OR: 1.14, P = 0.54). Patients in the LDCT group received a significantly lower radiation dose (MD: ‒209.87, P < 0.00001) than patients in the SDCT group. Significant heterogeneity was observed with respect to the operative duration and radiation dose endpoints (I2 = 84% and 100%, respectively). Conclusions: Relative to SDCT-guided lung biopsy, an LDCT-guided approach is equally safe and can achieve comparable diagnostic efficacy while exposing patients to lower doses of radiation.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded6    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal