Transthoracic Computed Tomography–Guided Lung Nodule Biopsy: Comparison of Core Needle and Fine Needle Aspiration Techniques

Abstract

PurposeTo determine if there is a statistically significant difference in the computed tomography (CT)–guided trans-thoracic needle biopsy diagnostic rate, complication rate, and degree of pathologist confidence in diagnosis between core needle biopsy (CNB) and fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB). MethodsA retrospective cohort design was used to compare the diagnostic biopsy rate, diagnostic confidence, and biopsy-related complications of pneumothorax, chest tube placement, pulmonary hemorrhage, hemoptysis, admission to hospital, and length of stay between 251 transthoracic needle biopsies obtained via CNB (126) or FNAB (125). Complication rates were assessed using imaging and clinical follow-up. Final diagnosis was confirmed via surgical pathology or clinical follow-up over a period of up to 10 years. ResultsCNB provided diagnostic samples in 91% and FNA in 80% of biopsies, which was statistically significant (P < .05). The sensitivities for CNB and FNAB were 89% (85 of 95) and 95% (84 of 88), respectively. The specificity of CNB was 100% (21 of 21) and for FNAB was 81% (2 of 11) with 2 false positives in the FNAB group.The differences in complication rate was not statistically significant for pneumothorax (50% vs 46%; determined by routine postbiopsy CT), chest tube (2% vs 4%), hemoptysis (4% vs 6%), and pulmonary hemorrhage (38% vs 47%) between FNAB and CNB, respectively. Seven patients requiring chest tube were admitted to hospital, 2 in the FNAB cohort for an average of 2.5 days and 5 in the CNB cohort for an average of 4.6 days. ConclusionsCNB provided more diagnostic samples with no statistical difference in complication rate.