Transvaginal Ultrasound-Guided Core Biopsy—Experiences in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
Pathological Procedure
3. Results
3.1. Results of All 303 Cases
3.1.1. Association of Histological Groups with the Biopsy Location
3.1.2. Complications
3.2. Results of 94 Patients Who Underwent Surgical Exploration
3.2.1. Comparative Analysis of Tru-Cut Biopsy and Surgically Obtained Histological Results (94/303 Cases)
3.2.2. Pathological Evaluation of Inaccurate Histological Results (12/94 Cases)
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Localization | Types of Tumours | Subtypes | Stains (Considering the Clinical Data and Histomorphology) |
---|---|---|---|
Adnexa/peritoneum | Undifferentiated tumour | - | Basic panel: AE1/AE3, CK7, CK8/18, SALL4, Vimentin, LCA, PAX8, SOX10 (further IH stains depend on the results) |
- | Epithelial tumour | - | - |
- | - | Suspicion of metastatic epithelial tumour | CK7, CK20, CDX2 (CDH17, SATB2), PAX8, TTF1, GATA3 |
- | - | Serous | PAX8, WT1, p53 |
- | - | Mucinous | CK7, CK20, CDX2, (CDH17, SATB2), PAX8, ER |
- | - | Endometrioid | (Sometimes exclusionary diagnosis): CK7, CK20, CDX2, PAX8, WT1, p53, ER, (p63, CD10, SATB2: morula formation) (clinical data to rule out metastasis of endometrial origin) |
- | - | Clear cell | PAX8, ER, WT1, p53, HNF1ß (clinical data to rule out metastasis of renal or endometrial origin) |
- | - | Brenner tumour | GATA3, CK7, CK20, p63 (clinical data to rule out metastasis of urothelial origin) |
- | - | MMMT | p53 (furthermore, it depends on its components if it is necessary) (clinical data to rule out metastasis of endometrial origin) |
- | Stromal tumour | - | inhibin, calretinin, CK, WT1, FOXL2 or Dicer 1 mutation analysis |
- | Germ cell tumour | - | SALL4, OCT3/4, PLAP (D240, ckit), CD30, AFP, (GATA3, HNF1ß), ß-HCG, hPL, CK7, GATA3, in case of teratoma, it depends on the components |
Cervix | Squamous cell carcinoma | - | (p63, p16) |
Cervix/endometrium | adenocarcinoma | HPV-associated | p16, p53, ER, PR, Vimentin, (HPV-analysing) |
- | - | non-HPV-associated | p16, p53, ER, PR, MMR proteins, (other type-specific markers, such as MUC6, GATA3, calretinin, CD10, TTF1, HNF1ß, CD56, ChrA, Synaptophysin) (clinical data to confirm the exact origin) |
Endometrium | Adenocarcinoma | - | p16, p53, ER, PR, CK, PAX8 (avoiding to confuse serous or dedifferentiated carcinoma with grade I–II endometrioid carcinoma) |
mesenchymal tumours | Stroma and leiomyoma tumours | - | CD10, Cyclin D1, SMA, desmin, h-caldesmon, ER, PR, p16, p53, Ki-67 |
Histological Groups/Sampling Site (n) | Adnexa | Uncertain | Rectovaginal Spatium | Peritoneum | Endometrium | Uterus | PIL | Cervix/ Parametrium | Bladder | Vaginal Stump or Wall | Retroperitoneum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
High-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 37 | 17 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
Low-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 4 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 |
Non-epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Low-grade endometrial carcinoma | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
High-grade endometrial carcinoma (carcinosarcoma too) | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
Malignant mesenchymal corpus tumour | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
Cervical squamous cell tumour | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 5 | 0 |
Cervical adenocarcinoma | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
Gastrointestinal tumour | 14 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
Breast tumour | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Other | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Benign | 16 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Sine morbo | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 12 | 4 | 8 | 0 |
Vulva | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Uncertain | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
References
- Mascilini, F.; Quagliozzi, L.; Moro, F.; Moruzzi, M.C.; De Blasis, I.; Paris, V.; Scambia, G.; Fagotti, A.; Testa, A.C. Role of transvaginal ultrasound-guided biopsy in gynecology. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2020, 30, 128–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Woodcock, N.P.; Glaves, I.; Morgan, D.R.; MacFie, J. Ultrasound-guided Tru-cut biopsy of the breast. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 1998, 80, 253–256. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Chopra, S.; Rowe, E.W.J.; Laniado, M.; Patel, A. A prospective study analysing the effect of pain on probe insertion, and the biopsy strategy, on patients’ perception of pain during TRUS-guided biopsy of the prostate. N. Z. Med. J. 2008, 121, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- O’Neill, M.J.; Rafferty, E.A.; Lee, S.I.; Arellano, R.S.; Gervais, D.A.; Hahn, P.F.; Yoder, I.C.; Mueller, P.R. Transvaginal interventional procedures: Aspiration, biopsy, and catheter drainage. Radiographics 2001, 221, 657–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Plett, S.K.; Poder, L.; Brooks, R.A.; Morgan, T.A. Transvaginal ultrasound-guided biopsy of deep pelvic masses. How we do it. J. Ultrasound Med. 2016, 35, 1113–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giede, C.; Toi, A.; Chapman, W.; Rosen, B. The use of transrectal ultrasound to biopsy pelvic masses in women. Gynecol. Oncol. 2004, 95, 552–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savader, B.L.; Hamper, U.M.; Sheth, S.; Ballard, R.L.; Sanders, R.C. Pelvic masses: Aspiration biopsy with transrectal US guidance. Radiology 1990, 176, 351–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larsen, T.; Torp-Pedersen, S.; Bostofte, E.; Rank, F. Transperineal fine needle biopsy of gynecological tumors guided by transrectal ultrasound: A new method. Gynecol. Oncol. 1985, 22, 281–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, C.; Wang, L.; Zhang, C.; Li, X. Transvaginal/transrectal ultrasound-guided aspiration biopsy for diagnosis of pelvic/pelvic floor tumors in females: A retrospective analysis. Exp. Ther. Med. 2019, 18, 352–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Won, S.Y.; Kim, H.-S.; Park, S.-Y. Transrectal or transvaginal ultrasond-guided biopsy for pelvic masses: External validation and usefulness in oncologic patients. Ultrasonography 2019, 38, 149–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gupta, S.; Nguyen, H.L.; Morello Jr, F.A.; Ahrar, K.; Wallace, M.J.; Madoff, D.C.; Murthy, R.; Hicks, M.E. Various approaches for CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of deep pelvic lesions: Anatomic and technical considerations. Radiographics 2004, 24, 175–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, B.K. Ultrasound-guided genitourinary interventions: Principles and techniques. Ultrasonography 2017, 36, 336–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sheth, S.S.; Angirish, J. Transvaginal trucut biopsy in patients with abdominopelvic mass. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 1995, 50, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, S.-Y.; Xiong, Y.-H.; Yun, M.; Liu, L.-Z.; Zheng, W.; Lin, X.; Pei, X.-Q.; Li, A.-H. Transvaginal ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy of pelvic masses. J. Ultrasound Med. 2018, 37, 453–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ylagan, L.R.; Mutch, D.G.; Dávila, R.M. Transvaginal fine needle aspiration biopsy. Acta Cytol. 2001, 45, 927–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faulkner, R.L.; Mohiyiddeen, L.; McVey, R.; Kitchener, H.C. Transvaginal biopsy in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. BJOG 2005, 112, 991–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thabet, A.; Somarouthu, B.; Oliva, E.; Gervais, D.A.; Hahn, P.F.; Lee, S.I. Image-guided ovarian mass biopsy: Efficacy and safety. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2014, 25, 1922–1927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fischerova, D.; Cibula, D.; Dundr, P.; Zikan, M.; Calda, P.; Freitag, P.; Slama, J. Ultrasound-guided Tru-cut biopsy in the management of advanced abdomino-pelvic tumors. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2008, 18, 833–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zikan, M.; Fischerova, D.; Pinkavova, I.; Dundr, R.; Cibula, D. Ultrasound-guided Tru-cut biopsy of abdominal and pelvic tumors in gynecology. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2010, 36, 767–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Epstein, E.; Van Calster, B.; Timmerman, D.; Nikman, S. Subjective ultrasound assessment, the ADNEX model and ultrasound-guided Tru-cut biopsy to differentiate disseminated primary ovarian cancer from metastatic non-ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016, 47, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- VanderLaan, P.A. Fine-needle aspiration and core needle biopsy: An update on 2 common minimally invasive tissue sampling modalities. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016, 124, 862–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Vizzielli, G.; Constantini, B.; Tortorella, L. Influence of intraperitoneal dissemination assessed by laparoscopy on prognosis of advanced ovarian cancer: An exploratory analysis of a single-institution experience. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2014, 21, 3970–3977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walker, J. Transvaginal ultrasound guided biopsies in the diagnosis of pelvic lesions. Minim. Invasive Ther. Allied Technol. 2003, 12, 241–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khati, N.J.; Gorodenker, J.; Hill, M.C. Ultrasound-guided biopsies of the abdomen. Ultrasound Q. 2011, 27, 255–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yarram, S.G.; Nghiem, H.V.; Higgins, E.; Fox, G.; Nan, B.; Francis, I.R. Evaluation of imaging-guided core biopsy of pelvic masses. AJR 2007, 188, 1208–12011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitra, S.; Dey, P. Fine-needle aspiration and core biopsy in the diagnosis of breast lesions: A comparison and review of the literature. Cytojournal 2016, 13, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lukasiewicz, E.; Ziemiecka, A.; Jakubowski, W.; Vojinovic, J.; Bogucevska, M.; Dobruch-Sobczak, K. Fine-needle versus core-needle biopsy—Which on to choose in preoperative assessment of focal lesions in the breasts? Literature review. J. Ultrason. 2017, 17, 267–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elsheikh, T.-M.; Silverman, J.-F. Fine needle aspiration and core needle biopsy of metastatic malignancy of unknown primary site. Mod. Pathol. 2019, 32, S58–S70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parameter | Value (n = 303) |
---|---|
Median age (yr) (range) | 61 (21–93) |
Median biopsy core number (range) | 4 (1–9) |
Indication of biopsy sampling | - |
Suspicion of a primary cancerous process | 186 (61.4%) |
Suspicion of recurrence | 76 (25.1%) |
Exclusion of malignancy | 21 (6.9%) |
Suspicion of metastasis | 13 (4.3%) |
Suspicion of a residual tumour | 7 (2.3%) |
Previous history of malignancy | - |
One previous malignant tumour | 123 (40.6%) |
Two previous malignant tumours | 12 (4.0%) |
More than two previous malignant tumours | 1 (0.3%) |
No known previous malignant tumour | 167 (55.1%) |
Previous history of gynaecological cancer | - |
Yes | 84 (27.7%) |
No | 219 (72.3%) |
Site of biopsy | - |
Adnexa | 90 (29.7%) |
Vaginal stump or wall | 41 (13.5%) |
Uterus | 35 (11.6%) |
Peritoneum | 31 (10.2%) |
Cervix/parametrium | 28 (9.2%) |
Parailiac lymph nodes (PIL) | 10 (3.3%) |
Rectovaginal septum | 9 (3.0%) |
Bladder | 7 (2.3%) |
Endometrium | 4 (1.3%) |
Retroperitoneum | 1 (0.3%) |
Uncertain pelvic lesion | 47 (15.5%) |
Preliminary imaging | - |
CT | 155 (51.2%) |
US | 67 (22.1%) |
MRI | 58 (19.1%) |
PET-CT | 23 (7.6%) |
Parameter | Value (n = 303) |
---|---|
Adequate histology obtained (patients) | 299 (98.7%) |
Adequate histology not obtained (patients) | 4 (1.3%) |
Median elapsed days between sampling and histological diagnosis (range) | 7 (3–26) |
Median number of immunohistochemical (IHC) reactions used for all histology samples (range) | 2 (0–13) |
Median number of IHC reactions by histological groups (range) | - |
High-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 2 (0–12) |
Low-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 4.5 (0–9) |
Non-epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 6 (2–9) |
Low-grade endometrial carcinoma | 5 (0–8) |
High-grade endometrial carcinoma and carcinosarcoma | 5 (3–12) |
Malignant uterine mesenchymal tumour | 5 (4–12) |
Cervical squamous cell carcinoma | 2 (0–11) |
Cervical adenocarcinoma | 7 (4–10) |
Gastrointestinal tumour | 4 (2–12) |
Breast carcinoma | 8 (3–13) |
Vulva | 0 (0–0) |
Other malignant | 6.5 (2–10) |
Unknown | 6 (4–10) |
All benign | 0 (0–13) |
Primary origin of the malignant lesion | - |
Ovarian | 103 (34.1%) |
Gastrointestinal | 31 (10.3%) |
Cervical | 29 (9.6%) |
Endometrial | 17 (5.6%) |
Uterine mesenchymal | 10 (3.3%) |
Breast | 9 (3.0%) |
Haematological | 4 (1.3% |
Vulvar | 2 (0.7%) |
Bladder | 1 (0.3%) |
Skin | 1 (0.3%) |
Soft tissue | 1 (0.3%) |
Unknown (neuroendocrine) | 1 (0.3%) |
Non-malignant | 93 (30.8%) |
Types of malignancy | - |
Primary tumour | 111 (55.2%) |
Recurrence | 49 (24.4%) |
Metastasis | 38 (18.9%) |
Residual tumour | 3 (1.5%) |
Further subsequent treatment | - |
Chemotherapy | 107 (35.3%) |
Surgery | 72 (23.8%) |
Observation | 30 (9.9%) |
None | 15 (5.0%) |
Radiotherapy | 12 (4.0%) |
Best supportive care | 5 (1.7%) |
No information | 62 (20.5%) |
Histological Groups/Types of Malignancy (n = 201) | Primary Tumour | Metastasis | Recurrence | Residual Tumour |
---|---|---|---|---|
High-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 77 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
Low-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 6 | 1 | 5 | 0 |
Non-epithelial ovarian carcinoma | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
Low-grade endometrial carcinoma | 4 | 0 | 5 | 0 |
High-grade endometrial carcinoma and carcinosarcoma | 8 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
Malignant uterine mesenchymal tumour | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
Cervical squamous cell carcinoma | 6 | 1 | 13 | 3 |
Cervical adenocarcinoma | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
Gastrointestinal tumour | 2 | 22 | 7 | 0 |
Breast carcinoma | 0 | 6 | 3 | 0 |
Vulva | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Other | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 |
Surgery: Malignant | Surgery: Benign | |
---|---|---|
Biopsy: malignant | 73 (True malignant) | 1 (False positive) |
Biopsy: benign | 4 (False negative) | 16 (True benign) |
Histology of Biopsy | Histology of Surgery |
---|---|
Undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma | Serous endometrial carcinoma |
Thecoma | Granulosa cell tumour |
Serous borderline tumour | Low-grade serous tumour |
Borderline clear cell tumour | Invasive clear cell carcinoma |
Endometrial complex hyperplasia without atypia | Well-differentiated endometrial carcinoma |
Suspicion of malignant soft tissue tumour | Immature teratoma |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lengyel, D.; Vereczkey, I.; Kőhalmy, K.; Bahrehmand, K.; Novák, Z. Transvaginal Ultrasound-Guided Core Biopsy—Experiences in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre. Cancers 2021, 13, 2590. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112590
Lengyel D, Vereczkey I, Kőhalmy K, Bahrehmand K, Novák Z. Transvaginal Ultrasound-Guided Core Biopsy—Experiences in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre. Cancers. 2021; 13(11):2590. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112590
Chicago/Turabian StyleLengyel, Dániel, Ildikó Vereczkey, Krisztina Kőhalmy, Kiarash Bahrehmand, and Zoltán Novák. 2021. "Transvaginal Ultrasound-Guided Core Biopsy—Experiences in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre" Cancers 13, no. 11: 2590. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112590
APA StyleLengyel, D., Vereczkey, I., Kőhalmy, K., Bahrehmand, K., & Novák, Z. (2021). Transvaginal Ultrasound-Guided Core Biopsy—Experiences in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre. Cancers, 13(11), 2590. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112590