Predictors of bleeding complications following percutaneous image-guided liver biopsy: a scoping review.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biopsy, Fine-Needle
/ adverse effects
Child
Child, Preschool
Hemorrhage
/ complications
Humans
Image-Guided Biopsy
/ methods
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Liver
/ diagnostic imaging
Middle Aged
Needles
/ trends
Radiology, Interventional
/ methods
Risk Factors
Ultrasonography, Interventional
/ methods
Young Adult
Journal
Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)
ISSN: 1305-3612
Titre abrégé: Diagn Interv Radiol
Pays: Turkey
ID NLM: 101241152
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2019
Jan 2019
Historique:
entrez:
16
1
2019
pubmed:
16
1
2019
medline:
25
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Percutaneous tissue biopsy is a mainstay of diagnostic and interventional radiology, providing a minimally invasive method for diagnosing malignant and benign disease. The purpose of this review was to collect and summarize the best available evidence regarding the risk factors associated with bleeding complications in image-guided liver biopsy. A literature review was performed, searching Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH) databases for any studies evaluating bleeding complications in image-guided liver biopsy. A total of 68 articles, published between January 1994 and April 2015, were reviewed in full, with 34 ultimately eligible for inclusion in the review. Bleeding of any kind occurred in up to 10.9% of image-guided liver biopsies, with major bleeding episodes ranging from 0.1% to 4.6% and minor bleeding events occurring in up to 10.9% of biopsies. The overall rate of bleeding was, however, found to be less than 2%. Several risk factors (patient, operator, and procedure-related) were identified as potentially indicative of an increased risk of post-biopsy bleeding. Patient-related risk factors included patient age (>50 years or <2 years), inpatient status (8/12 vs. 4/12, P < 0.001), comorbidities and/or concurrent diagnoses and coagulation status (rate of bleeding was 3.3% for international normalized ratio [INR] 1.2-1.5 vs. 7.1% for INR >1.5, P < 0.001). There was no consensus on impact of operator experience (>200 biopsies/year vs. <50/year) on post-biopsy bleeding rate. Procedure-related risk factors included needle size (cutting biopsy vs. fine needle aspiration, P < 0.001) and the presence of a patent track on post-biopsy ultrasound (P < 0.001). Lastly there was no difference found between targeted vs. nontargeted biopsies and number of needle passes. Reported rate of post-biopsy bleeding ranges between 0% and 10.9%, although the vast majority of studies reported bleeding rates under 2%. Several patient, operator, and procedure-related risk factors are associated with a higher risk of bleeding following liver biopsy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30644369
doi: 10.5152/dir.2018.17525
pmc: PMC6339629
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
71-80Références
Hepatology. 2009 Mar;49(3):1017-44
pubmed: 19243014
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017 Aug;40(8):1141-1146
pubmed: 28584945
Eurasian J Med. 2015 Oct;47(3):161-4
pubmed: 26644763
Gut. 2007 Feb;56(2):307
pubmed: 17028125
Hepatology. 1996 May;23(5):1079-83
pubmed: 8621137
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Mar;194(3):784-9
pubmed: 20173160
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2005 Nov;41(5):639-43
pubmed: 16254523
J Clin Ultrasound. 2009 Mar-Apr;37(3):138-43
pubmed: 19184991
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 Dec;187(6):W644-9
pubmed: 17114519
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Feb;190(2):413-7
pubmed: 18212227
Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 Jun;97(6):1472-5
pubmed: 12094868
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Dec;197(6):W1135-9
pubmed: 22109331
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013 Nov;57(5):638-43
pubmed: 24177785
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Oct;8(10):877-83
pubmed: 20362695
Digestion. 2003;67(3):138-45
pubmed: 12853725
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Jul;189(1):109-16
pubmed: 17579159
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Sep;3(9):926-9
pubmed: 16234032
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2012 Jul;55(1):82-7
pubmed: 22249806
Diagn Interv Imaging. 2015 Jun;96(6):571-7
pubmed: 25771477
Gastroenterology. 2010 Oct;139(4):1230-7
pubmed: 20547160
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2010 Nov;51(5):635-7
pubmed: 20890218
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010 Jul;21(7):969-75
pubmed: 20304676
Dig Dis Sci. 2001 Jan;46(1):128-32
pubmed: 11270776
Liver Int. 2007 Nov;27(9):1166-73
pubmed: 17919227
Radiology. 2013 Jan;266(1):226-35
pubmed: 23143026
Liver Int. 2008 May;28(5):705-12
pubmed: 18433397
Pediatr Radiol. 2012 Nov;42(11):1322-5
pubmed: 22918268
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013 Nov;57(5):644-8
pubmed: 23799457
BMC Gastroenterol. 2012 Dec 05;12:173
pubmed: 23216751
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 May;24(5):792-9
pubmed: 19220661
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Sep;201(3):645-50
pubmed: 23971459
Ann Hepatol. 2004 Jul-Sep;3(3):100-3
pubmed: 15505594
Eur J Intern Med. 2005 Dec;16(8):571-4
pubmed: 16314238
Eur Radiol. 2004 Nov;14(11):2086-91
pubmed: 15316742
J Ultrasound Med. 2000 Aug;19(8):537-41
pubmed: 10944039
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012 Jun;23(6):727-36
pubmed: 22513394
Rom J Gastroenterol. 2005 Dec;14(4):379-84
pubmed: 16400355
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2000 Nov;31(5):536-9
pubmed: 11144439
Am J Hematol. 2005 Feb;78(2):85-93
pubmed: 15682411
Pediatr Radiol. 2003 Nov;33(11):772-5
pubmed: 12961044
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2000 Jan;35(1):102-7
pubmed: 10672843
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2011 Aug;53(2):202-6
pubmed: 21788763
Gut. 1999 Oct;45 Suppl 4:IV1-IV11
pubmed: 10485854
Gut. 1995 Mar;36(3):437-41
pubmed: 7698705
Intern Med J. 2006 Nov;36(11):692-9
pubmed: 17040353
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017 Oct;40(10):1501-1513
pubmed: 28523447
World J Gastroenterol. 1999 Aug;5(4):301-304
pubmed: 11819452