Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (2)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = para-mediastinal masses

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
15 pages, 3531 KiB  
Article
Patient Dose Estimation in Computed Tomography-Guided Biopsy Procedures
by Evangelia Siomou, Dimitrios K. Filippiadis, Efstathios P. Efstathopoulos, Ioannis Antonakos and George S. Panayiotakis
J. Imaging 2023, 9(12), 267; https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging9120267 - 30 Nov 2023
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3914
Abstract
This study establishes typical Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRL) values and assesses patient doses in computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy procedures. The Effective Dose (ED), Entrance Skin Dose (ESD), and Size-Specific Dose Estimate (SSDE) were calculated using the relevant literature-derived conversion factors. A retrospective analysis [...] Read more.
This study establishes typical Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRL) values and assesses patient doses in computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy procedures. The Effective Dose (ED), Entrance Skin Dose (ESD), and Size-Specific Dose Estimate (SSDE) were calculated using the relevant literature-derived conversion factors. A retrospective analysis of 226 CT-guided biopsies across five categories (Iliac bone, liver, lung, mediastinum, and para-aortic lymph nodes) was conducted. Typical DRL values were computed as median distributions, following guidelines from the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 135. DRLs for helical mode CT acquisitions were set at 9.7 mGy for Iliac bone, 8.9 mGy for liver, 8.8 mGy for lung, 7.9 mGy for mediastinal mass, and 9 mGy for para-aortic lymph nodes biopsies. In contrast, DRLs for biopsy acquisitions were 7.3 mGy, 7.7 mGy, 5.6 mGy, 5.6 mGy, and 7.4 mGy, respectively. Median SSDE values varied from 7.6 mGy to 10 mGy for biopsy acquisitions and from 11.3 mGy to 12.6 mGy for helical scans. Median ED values ranged from 1.6 mSv to 5.7 mSv for biopsy scans and from 3.9 mSv to 9.3 mSv for helical scans. The study highlights the significance of using DRLs for optimizing CT-guided biopsy procedures, revealing notable variations in radiation exposure between helical scans covering entire anatomical regions and localized biopsy acquisitions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Medical Imaging)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1333 KiB  
Article
Transesophageal Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine Needle Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Mediastinal Masses: A Retrospective Real-World Analysis
by Daniela Assisi, Filippo Tommaso Gallina, Daniele Forcella, Riccardo Tajè, Enrico Melis, Paolo Visca, Federico Pierconti, Emanuela Venti and Francesco Facciolo
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(18), 5469; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11185469 - 17 Sep 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3024
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays an important role in the diagnosis and staging of thoracic disease. Our report studies the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of EUS fine needle aspiration (FNA) in a homogenous cohort of patients according to the distribution of the [...] Read more.
Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays an important role in the diagnosis and staging of thoracic disease. Our report studies the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of EUS fine needle aspiration (FNA) in a homogenous cohort of patients according to the distribution of the enlarged MLNs or pulmonary masses. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the diagnostic performance of 211 EUS-FNA in 200 consecutive patients with enlarged or PET-positive MLNs and para-mediastinal masses who were referred to our oncological center between January 2019 and May 2020. Results: The overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA was 85% with a corresponding negative predictive value (NPV) of 56% and an accuracy of 87.5%. The sensitivity and accuracy in patients with abnormal MLNs were 81.1% and 84.4%, respectively. In those with para-mediastinal masses, sensitivity and accuracy were 96.4% and 96.8%. The accuracy for both masses and lymph nodes was 100%, and in the LAG (left adrenal gland), it was 66.6%. Conclusions: Our results show that, in patients with suspected mediastinal masses, EUS-FNA is an accurate technique to evaluate all reachable mediastinal nodal stations, including station 5. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop