Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 21, 2025
Use of Electromagnetic Navigational Transthoracic Needle Aspiration E-TTNA for Sampling of Lung Nodules
Published on: May 23, 2015
CT-guided needle biopsy is not associated with increased ipsilateral pleural metastasis
Benedikt Niedermaier1, Yao Kou2, Elizabeth Tong3
1Department of Thoracic Surgery, Thoraxklinik at the University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the German Center for Lung Research, Heidelberg, Germany.
Introduction:
Histological confirmation of a lung tumor is the prerequisite for treatment planning. It has been suspected that CT-guided needle biopsy (CTGNB) exposes the patient to a higher risk of pleural recurrence. However, the distance between tumor and pleura has largely been neglected as a possible confounder when comparing CTGNB to bronchoscopy.
Methods:
All patients with lung cancer histologically confirmed by bronchoscopy or CTGNB between 2010 and 2020 were enrolled and studied. Patients' medical histories, radiologic and pathologic findings and surgical records were reviewed. Pleural recurrence was diagnosed by pleural biopsy, fluid cytology, or by CT chest imaging showing progressive pleural nodules.
Results:
In this retrospective unicenter analysis, 844 patients underwent curative resection for early-stage lung cancer between 2010 and 2020. Median follow-up was 47.5 months (3-137). 27 patients (3.2 %) with ipsilateral pleural recurrence (IPR) were identified. The distance of the tumor to the pleura was significantly smaller in patients who underwent CTGNB. A tendency of increased risk of IPR was observed in tumors located in the lower lobe (HR: 2.18 [±0.43], p = 0.068), but only microscopic pleural invasion was a significant independent predictive factor for increased risk of IPR (HR: 5.33 [± 0.51], p = 0.001) by multivariate cox analysis. Biopsy by CTGNB did not affect IPR (HR: 1.298 [± 0.39], p = 0.504).
Conclusion:
CTGNB is safe and not associated with an increased incidence of IPR in our cohort of patients. This observation remains to be validated in a larger multicenter patient cohort.
