Download PDF
Z Gastroenterol 2012; 50(9): 989-995
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1299309
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Aktuelle Praxis zur Durchführung ultraschallgesteuerter Punktionen an gastroenterologischen Abteilungen

Ultrasonographically Guided Biopsy Procedures: Current Practice in Hospitals with Established Departments of Gastroenterology
S. van der Ham   1
,
M. M. Hänle   1
,
J. Klaus
,
S. Öztürk
,
R. Lorenz
,
W. Kratzer
Further Information

Publication History

21 October 2011

28 January 2012

Publication Date:
10 September 2012 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Ziel: Abdominale ultraschallgesteuerte Punktionen werden in Kliniken täglich vielfach durchgeführt. Bisher existieren wenige Leitlinien oder Empfehlungen für dieses Verfahren. Ziel der Studie war es, die aktuelle Praxis bei ultraschallgesteuerten Punktionen an größeren deutschen gastroenterologischen Fachabteilungen zu erfragen.

Material und Methoden: An 349 deutschen Kliniken mit eigener Gastroenterologie und einer Bettenzahl größer 500 wurden 349 Kliniken mit einem Fragebogen zu Vorbereitung, Vorgehen und postinterventioneller Überwachung bei ultraschallgesteuerter Punktion angeschrieben. Die Rücklaufquote betrug 51 % (n = 177).

Ergebnisse: Insgesamt 51,2 % (88/172) der Kliniken legen vor Punktion grundsätzlich einen venösen Zugang. Eine Analgosedierung führen 19,1 % (33/173) der Kliniken standardmäßig und 60,1 % (104/173) bei Bedarf durch. Eine Lokalanästhesie wird in 84,8 % (145/171) der Kliniken eingesetzt. Zur gezielten Punktion verwenden 40,6 % (81/176) der befragten Kliniken einen Punktionsschallkopf, 29,5 % (52/176) einen ansteckbaren Punktionsaufsatz. Eine Mindestthrombozytenzahl von 50 000/µl vor Punktion fordern 80,6 % (141/175) der Kliniken. In 86,5 % (147/170) der Kliniken wird als Grenzwert für den Quick-Test mindestens 50 % verwendet. Die am häufigsten von den Kliniken angegebenen Grenzwerte für International Normalized Ratio (INR) liegen zwischen 1 und 1,5 und für die partiale Thromboplastinzeit (PTT) zwischen 28 und 50 s. Das Pausieren gerinnungshemmender Medikamente wird sehr heterogen gehandhabt. Die postinterventionelle Überwachungszeit bei ambulanten Punktionen liegt zwischen 2 – 24 h.

Schlussfolgerung: Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass bei der Vorbereitung ultraschallgesteuerter Punktionen, beim Punktionsvorgang und bei der Nachsorge erhebliche Unterschiede in der täglichen Praxis bestehen. Die Erstellung einer Leitlinie zur standardisierten Durchführung ultraschallgesteuerter Punktionen scheint sinnvoll zu sein.

Abstract

Objective: Ultrasonographically guided adominal biopsies are a frequent daily procedure in German hospitals. There are, however, few guidelines or recommendations for these common procedures. The oive of the current study was to assess current practice with respect to ultrasonographically guided biopsy procedures in a survey of hospitals with established departments of gastroenterology or with over 500 beds.

Material and Method: A questionnaire addressing the preparation for, procedure during, and post-interventional monitoring following ultrasonographically guided biopsies was mailed to 349 German hospitals. The response rate was 51 % (n = 177).

Results: Establishment of an intravenous access is standard in 51.2 % (88/172) of the hospitals. Sedation analgesia is standard in 19.1 % (33/173) of the hospitals and is an option in a further 60.1 % (104/173). Local anesthesia is performed in 84.8 % (145/171) of the hospitals. A dedicated transducer for targeted biopsy is used in 40.6 % (81/176) of the hospitals, while 29.5 % (52/176) use a separate biopsy bracket attached to the probe. In 80.6 % (141/175) of the hospitals, a minimum platelet count of 50,000/µL is required. A minimum of 50 % is used as limit for quick in 86.5 % (147/170) of the hospitals. A value of 1 − 1.5 for the international normalized ratio (INR) is most commonly used in the hospitals. A partial thromboplastin time (PTT) between 28 and 50 sec. is used as the upper limit. Interruption of anticoagulants is handled in a very heterogeneous manner. Postinterventional monitoring following biopsy in ambulatory patients ranges from two to 24 hours.

Conclusion: Our survey shows relevant differences in preparation, execution and postinterventional monitoring in ultrasonographically guided biopsy procedures as routinely performed in German hospitals. There seems to be a need for a guideline standardising ultrasonographically guided biopsy procedures.

Schlüsselwörter

Punktionen - Nadelbiopsie - Feinnadelbiopsie - Ultraschall - interventioneller Ultraschall

Key words

punctures - biopsy needle - fine-needle biopsy - ultrasonography - interventional ultrasonography

1 Both authors contributed equally.


 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Winter TC, Lee Jr FT, Hinshaw JL. Ultrasound-guided biopsies in the abdomen and pelvis. Ultrasound Q 2008; 24: 45-68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Von Frerichs FT. Ueber den Diabetes. Berlin: Hirschwald; 1884
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Menghini G. One-second needle biopsy of the liver. Gastroenterology 1958; 35: 190-199
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Berlyne GM. Ultrasonics in renal biopsy: an aid to determination of kidney position. Lancet 1961; 2: 750-751
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Joyner Jr CR, Herman RJ, Reid JM. Reflected ultrasound in the detection and localization of pleural effusion. JAMA 1967; 200: 399-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Holm HH. Interventional ultrasound in Europe. Ultrasound Med Biol 1998; 24: 779-791
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kratochwil A. Presentation: Ultrasonic localization of the placenta. First World Congress on Ultrasonic Diagnostics in Medicine, Vienna: 1969
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD et al. Liver biopsy. Hepatology 2009; 49: 1017-1044
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Grant A, Neuberger J. Guidelines on the use of liver biopsy in clinical practice. British Society of Gastroenterology. Gut 1999; 45 (Suppl. 04) IV1-IV11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Jenssen C, Dietrich CF. Kontraindikationen, Komplikationen, Komplikationsmanagement. In: Christoph F. Dietrich Dieter Verlag. Interventioneller Ultraschall, Lehrbuch und Atlas für die interventionelle Sonografie. Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag KG; 2011: 127-149
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Maya ID, Allon M. Percutaneous renal biopsy: outpatient observation without hospitalization is safe. Semin Dial 2009; 22: 458-461
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Weigand K. Percutaneous liver biopsy: retrospective study over 15 years comparing 287 inpatients with 428 outpatients. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 24: 792-799
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Klassen DK, Weir MR, Cangro CB et al. Pancreas allograft biopsy: safety of percutaneous biopsy-results of a large experience. Transplantation 2002; 73: 553-555
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Malek SK, Potdar S, Martin JA et al. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided pancreas allograft biopsy: a single-center experience. Transplant Proc 2005; 37: 4436-4437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Eloubeidi MA, Jhala D, Chhieng DC et al. Yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma. Cancer 2003; 99: 285-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 495-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Little AF, Ferris JV, Dodd 3rd GD et al. Image-guided percutaneous hepatic biopsy: effect of ascites on the complication rate. Radiology 1996; 199: 79-83
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Murphy FB, Barefield KP, Steinberg HV et al. CT- or sonography-guidedbiopsy of the liver in the presence of ascites: frequency of complications. Am J Roentgenol 1988; 151: 485-486
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Feuerbach S, Schreyer A, Schlottmann K. Standards radiologisch bildgesteuerter Biopsien – Indikationsstellung, Technik, Komplikationen. Radiologie up2date 2003; 3: 207-224
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Glaser HJ, Pausch J (eds) Perkutane Leberbiopsie. In: Sauerbruch T, Scheurlen C, (Hrsg) Empfehlungen der deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS) für die Durchführung endoskopischen Untersuchungen 2002. 3. Aufl. Demeter Verlag im Georg Thieme Verlag; 296-300
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Karamshi M. Performing a percutaneous liver biopsy in parenchymal liver diseases. Br J Nurs 2008; 17: 746-752
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kugelmas M. Liver biopsy. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 1416-1417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Strassburg CP, Manns MP. Approaches to liver biopsy techniques – revisited. Semin Liver Dis 2006; 26: 318-327
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Nolsoe CP, Lorentzen T, Skjoldbye BO et al. The basics of interventional ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2007; 28: 248-263 ; quiz 264, 267
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Volpe A, Kachura JR, Geddie WR et al. Techniques, safety and accuracy of sampling of renal tumors by fine needle aspiration and core biopsy. J Urol 2007; 178: 379-386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 How to anticoagulate. Drug Ther Bull 1992; 30: 77-80
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Gunneson TJ, Menon KV, Wiesner RH et al. Ultrasound-assisted percutaneous liver biopsy performed by a physician assistant. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1472-1475
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Herts BR. Imaging guided biopsies of renal masses. Curr Opin Urol 2000; 10: 105-109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Giorgio A, Tarantino L, de Stefano G et al. Complications after interventional sonography of focal liver lesions: a 22-year single-center experience. J Ultrasound Med 2003; 22: 193-205
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Cadranel JF, Rufat P, Degos F. Practices of liver biopsy in France: results of a prospective nationwide survey. For the Group of Epidemiology of the French Association for the Study of the Liver (AFEF). Hepatology 2000; 32: 477-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Atwell TD, Smith RL, Hesley GK et al. Incidence of bleeding after 15,181 percutaneous biopsies and the role of aspirin. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194: 784-789
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Burger W, Chemnitius JM, Kneissl GD et al. Low-dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention – cardiovascular risks after its perioperative withdrawal versus bleeding risks with its continuation – review and meta-analysis. J Intern Med 2005; 257: 399-414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Biondi-Zoccai GG, Lotrionte M, Agostoni P et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the hazards of discontinuing or not adhering to aspirin among 50,279 patients at risk for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 2667-2674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Alexander JA, Smith BJ. Midazolam sedation for percutaneous liver biopsy. Dig Dis Sci 1993; 38: 2209-2211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Maya ID, Maddela P, Barker J et al. Percutaneous renal biopsy: comparison of blind and real-time ultrasound-guided technique. Semin Dial 2007; 20: 355-358
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Al Knawy B, Shiffman M. Percutaneous liver biopsy in clinical practice. Liver Int 2007; 27: 1166-1173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Pasha T, Gabriel S, Therneau T et al. Cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided liver biopsy. Hepatology 1998; 27: 1220-1226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Younossi ZM, Teran JC, Ganiats TG et al. Ultrasound-guided liver biopsy for parenchymal liver disease: an economic analysis. Dig Dis Sci 1998; 43: 46-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Riemann B, Menzel J, Schiemann U et al. Ultrasound-guided biopsies of abdominal organs with an automatic biopsy system. A retrospective analysis of the quality of biopsies and of hemorrhagic complications. Scand J Gastroenterol 2000; 35: 102-107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Rossi P, Sileri P, Gentileschi P et al. Percutaneous liver biopsy using an ultrasound-guided subcostal route. Dig Dis Sci 2001; 46: 128-132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Frieser M, Lindner A, Meyer S et al. Spectrum and bleeding complications of sonographically guided interventions of the liver and pancreas. Ultraschall in Med 2009; 30: 168-174
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Maturen KE, Nghiem HV, Marrero JA et al. Lack of tumor seeding of hepatocellular carcinoma after percutaneous needle biopsy using coaxial cutting needle technique. Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187: 1184-1187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Maturen KE, Nghiem HV, Caoili EM et al. Renal mass core biopsy: accuracy and impact on clinical management. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188: 563-570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Lieberman S, Libson E, Maly B et al. Imaging-guided percutaneous splenic biopsy using a 20- or 22-gauge cutting-edge core biopsy needle for the diagnosis of malignant lymphoma. Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181: 1025-1027
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Lieberman S, Libson E, Sella T et al. Percutaneous image-guided splenic procedures: update on indications, technique, complications, and outcomes. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2007; 28: 57-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Terjung B, Lemnitzer I, Dumoulin FL et al. Bleeding complications after percutaneous liver biopsy. An analysis of risk factors. Digestion 2003; 67: 138-145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar