Ultrathin Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy of the Lung with Transfissural Approach: Does It Increase the Risk of Pneumothorax?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Transthoracic fine-needle aspiration is an accurate and safe method for diagnosis of pulmonary lesions, and pneumothorax is the most frequent complication of the procedure. Crossing a lung fissure during biopsy has been thought to increase the risk of pneumothorax, and the need to cross a fissure is considered a relative contraindication. The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence and clinical significance of pneumothorax during needle aspiration biopsy performed with a transfissural approach in comparison with biopsies in which a fissure was not crossed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of the medical records of patients who underwent fluoroscopically guided transthoracic biopsy of pulmonary nodules with a 25-gauge needle yielded the cases of 107 consecutively registered patients (59 men, 48 women; mean age, 62 years). In 43 of the biopsies, the major fissure was crossed, and in 64 biopsies, the control procedures, the fissure was avoided. CT scans were assessed for lesion size and location, biopsy approach, length of needle path, number of needle punctures, and presence of emphysema. RESULTS: Pneumothorax occurred in 11 patients (25%) in the transfissural biopsy group and in 19 patients (30%) in the group in which the fissure was avoided (p = 0.64). Pneumothorax necessitated chest tube placement in two patients (5%) in the transfissural biopsy group and seven patients (11%) in the control group (p = 0.25). In both groups, emphysema in the needle path was associated with increased risk of pneumothorax (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Transthoracic needle biopsy with an ultrathin needle that crosses a lung fissure can be safely performed without increasing the rate of pneumothorax or the need for chest tube insertion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".