Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Dec;18(4):680-689.
doi: 10.5114/wiitm.2023.133073. Epub 2023 Nov 20.

Comparison of two methods for CT-guided pulmonary nodule location before thoracoscopic surgery

Affiliations

Comparison of two methods for CT-guided pulmonary nodule location before thoracoscopic surgery

Dehao Liu et al. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2023 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: Preoperative computed tomography (CT)-guided localization can shorten the time of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and accurately aid in pulmonary nodule removal.

Aim: To discuss the application value and safety of 2 kinds of breast localization needles and anchor localization needles in clinical practice for pulmonary nodules under CT guidance before VATS.

Material and methods: We retrospectively studied 215 patients with 247 pulmonary nodules, who underwent CT-guided pulmonary nodule location before VATS. The 2 kinds of localization needles were randomly used, and we collected and analysed the clinical data.

Results: We used breast and anchor localization needles in 27.9% and 72.1% of cases, respectively. Differences were observed in puncture localization time, detachment rate, and visual analogue scale (VAS). The detachment rate (0%) and positioning time (median: 12 min) were less in the anchor than in the breast localization needle group (8.7% and median: 13 min, respectively). The median VAS was approximately 2 and 5 in the anchor and breast localization needle groups, respectively. Surgical pathology revealed that 155 (62.8%) pulmonary nodules were malignant while 92 (37.2%) were benign. The primary distinction in surgical procedures is the higher proportion of segmental resections in the middle and inner band group (19.3%) compared to the periphery band group (4.2%).

Conclusions: Unlike breast localization needles, anchor localization needles can reduce pain and discomfort after positioning, and they are not easy to decouple. These 2 needles are safe for CT-guided localization, which can shorten the time of VATS and accurately aid in pulmonary nodule removal.

Keywords: localization needles; lung adenocarcinoma; pulmonary nodules; video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Photo 1
Photo 1
Comparison of the structure of the anchor localization needles (left) and 20 G breast localization needles (right); (A) overall structure of the anchor localization needles (left) and 20 G breast localization needles (right); (B) the structure after the positioning needle has been pushed out of the sheath. The anchor positioning needle consists of the 4-claw and tri-coloured positioning lines (left); 20 G breast localization needle consists of single hooks and a wire positioning needle (right)
Photo 2
Photo 2
Failed cases of resection of pulmonary nodules under video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) without preoperative localization in a middle-aged woman; (A) the CT image showed a ground glass nodule in the right upper lobe; (B) the CT image still showed the presence of pulmonary nodules in the right upper lobe; (C) preoperative localization was performed before VATS again; (D) a second post-VATS CT review showed that the ground glass nodule had been resected on the image; (E) half a year after operation, CT showed that there was no abnormal density shadow in the operation area; (F) the pathological results of the second postoperative surgical specimen showed pulmonary interstitial hyperplasia with focal collagenization

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 209-49. - PubMed
    1. Wood DE, Kazerooni EA, Baum SL, et al. Lung Cancer Screening, Version 3.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2018; 16: 412-41. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nawa T, Nakagawa T, Mizoue T, et al. A decrease in lung cancer mortality following the introduction of low-dose chest CT screening in Hitachi, Japan. Lung Cancer 2012; 78: 225-8. - PubMed
    1. Nawa T. Low-dose CT screening for lung cancer reduced lung cancer mortality in Hitachi City. Int J Radiat Biol 2019; 95: 1441-6. - PubMed
    1. de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with volume CT screening in a randomized trial. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 503-13. - PubMed