Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ

Year 2019, Volume: 21 Issue: 3, 325 - 331, 31.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.24938/kutfd.555778

Abstract

Amaç: Ultrasonografi rehberliğinde
yapılan perkütan kesici karaciğer parankim/lezyon biyopsilerinin nedenleri,
tanı alma oranları, komplikasyonları ve histopatolojik tanılarında klinik
tecrübemizin paylaşılması amaçlandı.

Gereç ve Yöntemler: 1 Ocak 2017-1
Mart 2019 tarihleri arasında, ultrasonografi rehberliğinde 18 gauge kesici otomatik
biyopsi iğnesi ile girilerek perkütan karaciğer parankim/lezyon biyopsisi
yaptığımız hastalar tespit edildi. Lezyon ve parankim biyopsisi olarak iki
gruba ayrıldı. Her iki grupta; komplikasyon, tanı alma oranı, biyopsi nedenleri
ve hepatit varlığı değerlendirildi. Lezyon biyopsilerinde; lezyonun sayısı, lokalizasyonu,
büyüklüğü, ekojenitesi, kistik-solid komponent varlığı, histopatoloji
sonuçları, parankim biyopsilerinde fibrozis skorları değerlendirildi.

Bulgular: Karaciğer biyopsisi yapılan 70 hastanın 47’si erkek (yaş ortalaması 43.1±19.8
/yıl), 23’ü kadın (yaş ortalaması 48.3±15.8 /yıl) idi.
Hastalardan 21’inde lezyon biyopsisi
yapılırken, 49’unda parankim biyopsisi yapıldı. Parankim/lezyon biyopsi yapılan
hastalarımızın 66 (%94.3)’sına tanı konuldu. Biyopsi
sonrası 66 hastada komplikasyon görülmedi, ancak 3 (%4.3) hastada ağrı ve 1 (%1.4)
hastada kanama komplikasyonları gözlendi. Lezyon dışında, b
iyopsi
yapılma nedenleri viral ve viral olmayan karaciğer fonksiyon testleri
yüksekliği idi. Parankim biyopsilerimizin %81.6’sında kronik hepatit saptandı.
Parankim biyopsisi ile lezyon biyopsisi komplikasyon ve tanı alma oranları
karşılaştırıldığında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık saptanmadı (p
> 0.05).


Sonuç: Ultrasonografi
rehberliğinde yapılan perkütan kesici karaciğer parankim/lezyon biyopsileri
yüksek tanı oranı ve düşük komplikasyon oranları ile güvenilir bir tanı
yöntemdir.

References

  • 1. Herruzo JS. Current indications of liver biopsy. Revista Espanola de Enfermedades Digestivas. 2006;98(2):122.
  • 2. Buscarini L, Fornari F, Bolondi L, Colombo P, Livraghi T, Magnolfi F et al. Ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of focal liver lesions: techniques, diagnostic accuracy and complications: a retrospective study on 2091 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1990;11(3):344-8.
  • 3. Piccinino F, Sagnelli E, Pasquale G, Giusti G, Battocchia A, Bernardi M et al. Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy: a multicentre retrospective study on 68 276 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1986;2(2):165-73.
  • 4. Dicle O, Obuz F, Küçükler C, Tankurt E, Pırnar T. Transfemoral karaciğer biyopsisi. Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji. 1995;1(1):389-92.
  • 5. Spârchez Z. Complications after percutaneous liver biopsy in diffuse hepatopathies. Rom J Gastroenterol. 2005;14(4):379-84.
  • 6. Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L, Callea F, De Groote J, Gudat F et al. Histological grading and staging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol. 1995;22(6):696-9.
  • 7. Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. Liver biopsy. Hepatol. 2009;49(3):1017-44.
  • 8. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:495-500.
  • 9. Riley TR. How often does ultrasound marking change the liver biopsy site? Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94(11):3320.
  • 10. Strassburg CP, Manns MP. Approaches to liver biopsy techniques-revisited. Semin Liver Dis. 2006;26(4):318-327.
  • 11. Riley TR., Ruggiero FM. The effect of processing on liver biopsy core size. Dig Dis Sci. 2008;53(10):2775-7.
  • 12. Kadri BA, Dingil G, Ungul U, Sahin G, Nil DU, Dogan K et al. Accuracy and safety of percutaneous US-guided needle biopsies in liver metastasis and hemangiomas. Minerva Gastroenterol Dietol. 2010;56(4):377-82.
  • 13. Campbell MS, Reddy KR. Review article: the evolving role of liver biopsy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20(3):249-59.
  • 14. Czaja AJ, Carpenter HA. Optimizing diagnosis from the medical liver biopsy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5(8):898-907.
  • 15. Castéra L, Nègre I, Samii K, Buffet C. Pain experienced during percutaneous liver biopsy. Hepatology. 1999;30(6):1529-30.
  • 16. Utku ÖG, Bektaş A. Diffüz karaciğer hastalıkları nedeniyle ayaktan veya yatarak yapılan karaciğer biyopsilerinin analizi. Ortadoğu Tıp Dergisi. 2018;10(3):331-42.
  • 17. Spycher C, Zimmermann A, Reichen J. The diagnostic value of liver biopsy. BMC Gastroenterol. 2001;1(1):12.
  • 18. Gilmore I, Burroughs A, Murray-Lyon I, Williams R, Jenkins D, Hopkins A. Indications, methods, and outcomes of percutaneous liver biopsy in England and Wales: an audit by the British Society of Gastroenterology and the Royal College of Physicians of London. Gut. 1995;36(3):437-41.
  • 19. McGill DB, Rakela J, Zinsmeister AR, Ott BJ. A 21-year experience with major hemorrhage after percutaneous liver biopsy. Gastroenterol. 1990;99(5):1396-400.
  • 20. Stewart CJ, Coldewey J, Stewart IS. Comparison of fine needle aspiration cytology and needle core biopsy in the diagnosis of radiologically detected abdominal lesions. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55(2):93-7.

Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Tru-Cut Liver Biopsy (Parenchymal and Lesion): Our Clinical Experience

Year 2019, Volume: 21 Issue: 3, 325 - 331, 31.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.24938/kutfd.555778

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to share our
clinical experience in ultrasound-guided percutaneous liver parenchymal/lesion
biopsies, causes, diagnostic rates, complications and histopathological diagnosis.

Material and Methods: From January 1, 2017 - March 1, 2017,
patients who underwent percutaneous liver parenchymal/lesion biopsy were
detected by an ultrasound-guided 18 gauge automatic tru-cut biopsy needle.
Lesion and parenchymal biopsy were divided into two groups. Both groups;
complications, diagnosis rate, biopsy causes and presence of hepatitis were
evaluated. In lesion biopsies; number, localization, size, echogenicity,
presence of cystic-solid components, histopathology results, and fibrosis
scores in parenchyma biopsies were evaluated.

Results: Of the 70 patients who underwent liver
biopsy, 47 were male (mean age 43.1±19.8) and 23 were female (mean age 48.3±15.8).
Lesion biopsy was performed in 21 patients, and parenchymal biopsy was
performed in 49 patients. Sixty-six of our patients who underwent
parenchyma/lesion biopsy were diagnosed (94.3%). No complication observed in 66
patients after the biopsy, but 3 patients (4.3%) pains and 1 patient (1.4%)
observed hemorrhage complications. Other than the lesion, the causes of biopsy
were the height of viral and non viral liver function tests. Chronic hepatitis
was found in 81.6%of our parenchyma biopsies. There was no statistically
significant difference between parenchymal biopsy and lesion biopsy complication
and diagnosis rates (p> 0.05).

Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided percutaneous tru-cut liver
parenchymal/lesion biopsy is a reliable diagnostic method with a high
diagnostic rate and low complication rates.

References

  • 1. Herruzo JS. Current indications of liver biopsy. Revista Espanola de Enfermedades Digestivas. 2006;98(2):122.
  • 2. Buscarini L, Fornari F, Bolondi L, Colombo P, Livraghi T, Magnolfi F et al. Ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of focal liver lesions: techniques, diagnostic accuracy and complications: a retrospective study on 2091 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1990;11(3):344-8.
  • 3. Piccinino F, Sagnelli E, Pasquale G, Giusti G, Battocchia A, Bernardi M et al. Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy: a multicentre retrospective study on 68 276 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1986;2(2):165-73.
  • 4. Dicle O, Obuz F, Küçükler C, Tankurt E, Pırnar T. Transfemoral karaciğer biyopsisi. Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji. 1995;1(1):389-92.
  • 5. Spârchez Z. Complications after percutaneous liver biopsy in diffuse hepatopathies. Rom J Gastroenterol. 2005;14(4):379-84.
  • 6. Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L, Callea F, De Groote J, Gudat F et al. Histological grading and staging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol. 1995;22(6):696-9.
  • 7. Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. Liver biopsy. Hepatol. 2009;49(3):1017-44.
  • 8. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:495-500.
  • 9. Riley TR. How often does ultrasound marking change the liver biopsy site? Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94(11):3320.
  • 10. Strassburg CP, Manns MP. Approaches to liver biopsy techniques-revisited. Semin Liver Dis. 2006;26(4):318-327.
  • 11. Riley TR., Ruggiero FM. The effect of processing on liver biopsy core size. Dig Dis Sci. 2008;53(10):2775-7.
  • 12. Kadri BA, Dingil G, Ungul U, Sahin G, Nil DU, Dogan K et al. Accuracy and safety of percutaneous US-guided needle biopsies in liver metastasis and hemangiomas. Minerva Gastroenterol Dietol. 2010;56(4):377-82.
  • 13. Campbell MS, Reddy KR. Review article: the evolving role of liver biopsy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20(3):249-59.
  • 14. Czaja AJ, Carpenter HA. Optimizing diagnosis from the medical liver biopsy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5(8):898-907.
  • 15. Castéra L, Nègre I, Samii K, Buffet C. Pain experienced during percutaneous liver biopsy. Hepatology. 1999;30(6):1529-30.
  • 16. Utku ÖG, Bektaş A. Diffüz karaciğer hastalıkları nedeniyle ayaktan veya yatarak yapılan karaciğer biyopsilerinin analizi. Ortadoğu Tıp Dergisi. 2018;10(3):331-42.
  • 17. Spycher C, Zimmermann A, Reichen J. The diagnostic value of liver biopsy. BMC Gastroenterol. 2001;1(1):12.
  • 18. Gilmore I, Burroughs A, Murray-Lyon I, Williams R, Jenkins D, Hopkins A. Indications, methods, and outcomes of percutaneous liver biopsy in England and Wales: an audit by the British Society of Gastroenterology and the Royal College of Physicians of London. Gut. 1995;36(3):437-41.
  • 19. McGill DB, Rakela J, Zinsmeister AR, Ott BJ. A 21-year experience with major hemorrhage after percutaneous liver biopsy. Gastroenterol. 1990;99(5):1396-400.
  • 20. Stewart CJ, Coldewey J, Stewart IS. Comparison of fine needle aspiration cytology and needle core biopsy in the diagnosis of radiologically detected abdominal lesions. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55(2):93-7.
There are 20 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Health Care Administration
Journal Section ART
Authors

Adnan Özdemir This is me

Mehmet Hamdi Şahan 0000-0001-8976-6157

Publication Date December 31, 2019
Submission Date April 18, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 21 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Özdemir, A., & Şahan, M. H. (2019). ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ. The Journal of Kırıkkale University Faculty of Medicine, 21(3), 325-331. https://doi.org/10.24938/kutfd.555778
AMA Özdemir A, Şahan MH. ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ. Kırıkkale Uni Med J. December 2019;21(3):325-331. doi:10.24938/kutfd.555778
Chicago Özdemir, Adnan, and Mehmet Hamdi Şahan. “ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ”. The Journal of Kırıkkale University Faculty of Medicine 21, no. 3 (December 2019): 325-31. https://doi.org/10.24938/kutfd.555778.
EndNote Özdemir A, Şahan MH (December 1, 2019) ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ. The Journal of Kırıkkale University Faculty of Medicine 21 3 325–331.
IEEE A. Özdemir and M. H. Şahan, “ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ”, Kırıkkale Uni Med J, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 325–331, 2019, doi: 10.24938/kutfd.555778.
ISNAD Özdemir, Adnan - Şahan, Mehmet Hamdi. “ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ”. The Journal of Kırıkkale University Faculty of Medicine 21/3 (December 2019), 325-331. https://doi.org/10.24938/kutfd.555778.
JAMA Özdemir A, Şahan MH. ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ. Kırıkkale Uni Med J. 2019;21:325–331.
MLA Özdemir, Adnan and Mehmet Hamdi Şahan. “ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ”. The Journal of Kırıkkale University Faculty of Medicine, vol. 21, no. 3, 2019, pp. 325-31, doi:10.24938/kutfd.555778.
Vancouver Özdemir A, Şahan MH. ULTRASONOGRAFİ REHBERLİĞİNDE PERKÜTAN KESİCİ KARACİĞER BİYOPSİSİ (PARANKİM VE LEZYON): KLİNİK DENEYİMİMİZ. Kırıkkale Uni Med J. 2019;21(3):325-31.

This Journal is a Publication of Kırıkkale University Faculty of Medicine.