Abstract 873: Comparison of Sonographic and CT Guidance Modalities in Percutaneous Abdominal Interventional Procedures: Does CT Fluoroscopy Decrease Procedure Time?
PURPOSE: Time and cost savings afforded by ultrasound over standard CT for guidance of percutaneous interventions has been well described. The purpose of this study was to compare ultrasound and CT-fluoroscopy guidance for needle biopsies and catheter drainages in the abdomen and pelvis.
METHOD AND MATERIALS: Over a 10 month period, 536 consecutive percutaneous interventions were performed including 325 biopsies, and 211 diagnostic aspirations or catheter drainages. Guidance modalities included standard CT (CT-S,n=108), CT fluoroscopy (CT-F, n=66), ultrasound with needle guide (US-N, n=331), and ultrasound with UltraguideĀ (US-U, n=31). A two-tailed students t-test compared guidance modalities, procedure times, and room times.
RESULTS: Mean procedure times for the four guidance modalities were as follows: US-N=49±19 min; US-U=50±29 min; CT-S=51±21 min; and CT-F=50±23 min. Mean room times were as follows: US-N=76±23min; US-U=77±24min; CT-S=85±31 min; and CT-F=76±26 min. Procedure times were not significantly different between US and CT-F guidance methods (p=0.99). US required less room time than CT-F (p=0.006). However exclusion of initial diagnostic CT scanning times eliminated room time differences between US and CT-F (p=0.69). Procedure times for percutaneous biopsies were not significantly different under CT-F or US guidance (p > 0.2). Likewise, drainage procedure times were not significantly different between modalities(p>0.2). CT-F required 14±11sec fluoroscopy time per procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: US guidance for percutaneous intervention has been shown to be faster and more cost-effective than the traditional CT alternative. However, CT-F now offers the advantages of CT localization with procedure times equivalent to US guidance techniques.
