Abstract

Objective To compare the clinical value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and conventional ultrasound-guided puncture biopsy in peripulmonary lesions of different sizes. Materials and Methods 110 patients with peripulmonary lesions were randomly divided into two groups: the conventional ultrasound-guided group and the contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided group. The lesions in the two groups were further divided into two groups according to the size of the lesions, and the tissues taken after puncture biopsy were sent for pathological examination. The pathological results were compared with the postoperative pathological results and other examination results, and the complications were recorded at the same time. Results In the conventional ultrasound group, the success rate of single puncture was 72.7% and the success rate of puncture was 80.0%; in the contrast group, the success rate of single puncture was 90.9% and the success rate of puncture was 94.6%. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in needle bleeding and pneumothorax between the two groups. In the <30 mm group, there was no significant difference in the success rate of single puncture and the success rate of puncture between the two groups according to the size of the lesions. In the ≥30 mm group, the success rate of single puncture (97.1%) and puncture success rate (97.1%) in the contrast guidance group were higher than those in the conventional ultrasound guidance group (70.3%, 78.4%) and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion Compared with conventional ultrasound, for peripheral pulmonary lesions guided by contrast-enhanced ultrasonography, especially when the maximum diameter of the lesion is ≥ 30 mm, needle biopsy has better guiding significance; for peripheral lung lesions with a maximum diameter of <30 mm, contrast-enhanced ultrasonography is compared with conventional ultrasound guidance. The puncture success rate was not significantly different.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.