[Value of core needle biopsy in preoperative diagnostics of soft tissue tumors: possibilities and limitations]

Accuracy of core needle biopsy for histologic diagnosis of soft tissue sarcoma

The biopsy technique of choice in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) diagnosis is controversial. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous core needle biopsy (CNB) and compared it to open incisional biopsy. A retrospective study included 91 incisional biopsies and 102 CNBs. A pair-match investigation was conducted on 19 patient pairs, comparing sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, we investigated the role of molecular pathology in sarcoma diagnostics. In 81/91 (89%) patients with incisional biopsy, the entity was confirmed by definitive pathology, whereas this was the case in 89/102 (87%) CNB patients (p = 0.52). Grading remained unchanged in 46/55 (84%) of incisional and 54/62 (87%) of CNBs (p = 0.61). The pair matched analysis showed that the correct entity was determined in 96% of incisional and 97.6% of core needle biopsies. The time between the initial consultation and the interdisciplinary tumor board's treatment recommendation was shorter in core needle biopsies (8.37 vs. 15.63 days; p < 0.002). Incisional biopsies led to two wound infections and one hematoma, whereas wound infection occurred in one patient after CNB. CNB leads to faster diagnosis while reaching the same histological accuracy and is less burdensome for patients. Still, surgeons need to remain aware of the possibility of biopsy failure.

Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy versus incisional biopsy in soft tissue sarcoma: an institutional experience

Core needle biopsy (CNB) is gaining in importance due to its advantages in the matter of patient morbidity, time and cost. Nevertheless, controversies still exist regarding the biopsy technique of choice for the accurate diagnosis of soft tissue sarcoma (STS). This retrospective cohort study compared the diagnostic performance between ultrasound-guided CNB and incisional biopsy (IB), both performed by orthopedic surgeons. The aims of the study were to answer the following questions: (1) Is ultrasound-guided CNB a highly reliable modality for diagnosing STSs? (2) Is CNB equally useful to IB for identifying histologic subtype? (3) Had patients who underwent CNB a reduced risk of complications? One-hundred and fifty-three patients who underwent resection of soft tissue sarcoma were classified into two groups according to biopsy technique prior to surgery; CNB group (n = 95) and IB group (n = 58). The final surgical specimens were in 40 patients liposarcoma (myxoid, pleomorphic and dedifferentiated), 39 undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), 33 myxofibrosarcoma, 10 synovial sarcoma, 10 leiomyosarcoma and in the remaining 21 patients different soft tissue sarcoma entities. Sarcoma location of 71 patients was in the thigh, 19 in the lower leg, 22 in the upper arm and shoulder area; 10 in the knee and gluteal region, 9 in the thoracic region, the residual 12 in other body areas. Malignancy was correctly diagnosed in 87% (83 of 95) for the CNB group and 93% (54/58) for the IB group. Correct identification rate of histologic subtype was 80% (76 of 95) in the CNB group and 83% (48 of 58) in the IB group. There were no significant differences in the correct diagnosis rates of malignancy and subtype between the two techniques. No complications were seen in the CNB group, whereas 2 patients in whom IB was performed developed pulmonary embolism and 1 patient surgical site infection. Ultrasound-guided CNB is highly accurate and not inferior to IB in diagnosing the dignity of lesions and histologic subtype in patients with suspected STSs.