| Title |
Real-time fluoroscopic needle guidance in the interventional radiology suite using navigational software for percutaneous bone biopsies in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Radiology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00247-017-3830-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sphoorti Shellikeri, Randolph M. Setser, Tiffany J. Hwang, Abhay Srinivasan, Ganesh Krishnamurthy, Seth Vatsky, Erin Girard, Xiaowei Zhu, Marc S. Keller, Anne Marie Cahill |
| Abstract |
Navigational software provides real-time fluoroscopic needle guidance for percutaneous procedures in the Interventional Radiology (IR) suite. We describe our experience with navigational software for pediatric percutaneous bone biopsies in the IR suite and compare technical success, diagnostic accuracy, radiation dose and procedure time with that of CT-guided biopsies. Pediatric bone biopsies performed using navigational software (Syngo iGuide, Siemens Healthcare) from 2011 to 2016 were prospectively included and anatomically matched CT-guided bone biopsies from 2008 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed with institutional review board approval. C-arm CT protocols used for navigational software-assisted cases included institution-developed low-dose (0.1/0.17 μGy/projection), regular-dose (0.36 μGy/projection), or a combination of low-dose/regular-dose protocols. Estimated effective radiation dose and procedure times were compared between software-assisted and CT-guided biopsies. Twenty-six patients (15 male; mean age: 10 years) underwent software-assisted biopsies (15 pelvic, 7 lumbar and 4 lower extremity) and 33 patients (13 male; mean age: 9 years) underwent CT-guided biopsies (22 pelvic, 7 lumbar and 4 lower extremity). Both modality biopsies resulted in a 100% technical success rate. Twenty-five of 26 (96%) software-assisted and 29/33 (88%) CT-guided biopsies were diagnostic. Overall, the effective radiation dose was significantly lower in software-assisted than CT-guided cases (3.0±3.4 vs. 6.6±7.7 mSv, P=0.02). The effective dose difference was most dramatic in software-assisted cases using low-dose C-arm CT (1.2±1.8 vs. 6.6±7.7 mSv, P=0.001) or combined low-dose/regular-dose C-arm CT (1.9±2.4 vs. 6.6±7.7 mSv, P=0.04), whereas effective dose was comparable in software-assisted cases using regular-dose C-arm CT (6.0±3.5 vs. 6.6±7.7 mSv, P=0.7). Mean procedure time was significantly lower for software-assisted cases (91±54 vs. 141±68 min, P=0.005). In our experience, navigational software technology in the IR suite is a promising alternative to CT guidance for pediatric bone biopsies providing comparable technical success and diagnostic accuracy with lower radiation dose and procedure time, in addition to providing real-time fluoroscopic needle guidance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| Colombia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 29% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 42% |
| Engineering | 4 | 17% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,913,373
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Radiology
#564
of 2,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,982
of 310,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Radiology
#21
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,092 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.