B型超声引导下手动式与弹枪式经皮肺穿刺活检对照研究  

Comparative study on manual and coaxial automated percutaneous lung biopsy under ultrasound guidance

作　　者：萧淑华[1] 梁妍琨[1] 卢树标[1] 周敏[1] 荣福[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省佛山市顺德第一人民医院呼吸内科,528300

出　　处：《临床超声医学杂志》2011年第7期478-480,共3页Journal of Clinical Ultrasound in Medicine

摘　　要：目的观察比较B型超声引导下手动式及弹枪式两种经皮肺穿刺活检法在诊断率、并发症、操作流程等方面的情况。方法选取紧贴胸壁的不明原因肺占位病变患者共49例,其中手动式组29例,采用手动式经皮肺活检法取得组织及细胞病理标本;弹枪式组20例,采用弹枪式活检法取得标本。结果手动式组诊断准确率93.1%(27/29),无气胸发生,发生出血者1例。弹枪式组诊断准确率95.0%(19/20),气胸发生1例,出血2例。两组在诊断准确率、气胸、出血发生率方面差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。手动式组操作平均需耗时(15±9)min,明显短于弹枪式组的(30±12)min,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 B型超声引导下手动式经皮肺穿刺活检法与传统弹枪式的诊断率、并发症相当,但能明显减少操作时间、简化操作流程,易于为初学者掌握,值得基层医院推广使用。Objective To analyze and compare the diagnostic rate, complications and operational processes between coaxial automated biopsy and manual biopsy in percutaneous lung biopsy under ultrasound guidance. Methods Forty - nine patients with undiagnosed pulmonary lesions closed to the chest wall were enrolled in this study, 29 patients were operated by manual percuaneous lung biopsy to get tissue and cell pathological sample, 20 patients were operated by a coxial automated biopsy device. Results In manual group, the diagnostic rate was 93. 1% （27/29）, no pneumothorax occured, 1 case of hemorrhage, the time of duration was （15 ~ 9） minutes; in coxial automated group, the diagnostic rate was 95.0% （19/20） , 1 case of pneumothorax, 2 cases of hemorrhag, the time of duration （30 ~ 12） minutes, respectively. There was no significant difference of diagnostic rate, pneumothorax rate and hemorrhage rate between the two groups （ P 〉 0.05 ） , while there was significant difference of operating time between the two groups （P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion The manual percutaneous lung biopsy under ultrasound guidance is recommended because of simple process and few complications.

关 键 词：超声引导 组织活检 经皮肺穿刺 

分 类 号：R445.1[医药卫生—影像医学与核医学] R825.6[医药卫生—诊断学]