Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CIRSE Guidelines on Percutaneous Needle Biopsy (PNB)

  • CIRSE Standards of Practice Guidelines
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Tam AL, Lim HJ, Wistuba II, Tamrazi A, Kuo MD, Ziv E, et al. Image-guided biopsy in the era of personalized cancer care: proceedings from the society of interventional radiology research consensus panel. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(1):8–19. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2015.10.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Solomon SB, Zakowski MF, Pao W, Thornton RH, Ladanyi M, Kris MG, et al. Core needle lung biopsy specimens: adequacy for EGFR and KRAS mutational analysis. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(1):266–9. doi:10.2214/AJR.09.2858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sacks D, McClenny TE, Cardella JF, Lewis CA. Society of interventional radiology clinical practice guidelines. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14:S199–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Taslakian B, Georges Sebaaly M, Al-Kutoubi A. Patient evaluation and preparation in vascular and interventional radiology: what every interventional radiologist should know (part 1: patient assessment and laboratory tests). Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(3):325–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lee MJ, Fanelli F, Haage P, Hausegger K, Van Lienden KP. Patient safety in interventional radiology: a CIRSE IR checklist. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35(2):244–6. doi:10.1007/s00270-011-0289-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Douketis JD, Spyropoulos AC, Spencer FA, Mayr M, Jaffer AK, Eckman MH, et al. American College of Chest Physicians. Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e326S–50S. doi:10.1378/chest.11-2298.

  7. Patel IJ, Davidson JC, Nikolic B, Salazar GM, Schwartzberg MS, Walker TG, et al. Standards of practice committee, with Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) Endorsement. Consensus guidelines for periprocedural management of coagulation status and hemostasis risk in percutaneous image-guided interventions. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012;23(6):727–36. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2012.02.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hinojar R, Jiménez-Natcher JJ, Fernández-Golfín C, Zamorano JL. New oral anticoagulants: a practical guide for physicians. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2015;1(2):134–45. doi:10.1093/ehjcvp/pvv002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lorentzen T, Nolsøe CP, Ewertsen C, Nielsen MB, Leen E, Havre RF, et al. EFSUMB. EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part I. General aspects (long version). Ultraschall Med. 2015;36(5):E1–14. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1553593.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zani EL, Clark OA, Rodrigues Netto N Jr. Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 May 11;(5):CD006576. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006576.pub2.

  11. Cussans A, Somani BK, Basarab A, Dudderidge TJ. The role of targeted prophylactic antimicrobial therapy before transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy in reducing infection rates: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2016;117(5):725–31. doi:10.1111/bju.13402.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McGrath A, Sabharwal T. General principles of biopsy and drainage. In: Gervais DA, Sabharwal T, editors. Interventional radiology procedures in biopsy and drainage. London: Springer-Verlag; 2011. p. 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gupta S, Krishnamurthy S, Broemeling LD, Morello FA Jr, Wallace MJ, Ahrar K, et al. Small (≤ 2-cm) subpleural pulmonary lesions: short- versus long-needle-path CT-guided biopsy—comparison of diagnostic yields and complications. Radiology. 2005;234:631–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sainani NI, Arellano RS, Shyn PB, Gervais DA, Mueller PR, Silverman SG. The challenging image-guided abdominal mass biopsy: established and emerging techniques ‘if you can see it, you can biopsy it’. Abdom Imaging. 2013;38(4):672–96. doi:10.1007/s00261-013-9980-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tsetis D, Uberoi R, Fanelli F, Roberston I, Krokidis M, van Delden O, et al. The provision of interventional radiology services in Europe: CIRSE recommendations. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(4):500–6. doi:10.1007/s00270-016-1299-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. ACR–SIR–SPR Practice parameter for the performance of image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy (PNB) Res. 35 – 2013, Amended 2014 (Res. 39). Available from http://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/PGTS/guidelines/PNB.pdf.

  17. Tam AL, Kim ES, Lee JJ, Ensor JE, Hicks ME, Tang X, et al. Feasibility of image-guided transthoracic core-needle biopsy in the BATTLE lung trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8(4):436–42. doi:10.1097/JTO.0b013e318287c91e.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gupta S. New techniques in image-guided percutaneous biopsy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2004;27(2):91–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Abi-Jaoudeh N, Kruecker J, Kadoury S, Kobeiter H, Venkatesan AM, Levy E, et al. Multimodality image fusion-guided procedures: technique, accuracy, and applications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35(5):986–98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Chehab MA, Brinjikji W, Copelan A, Venkatesan AM. navigational tools for interventional radiology and interventional oncology applications. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2015;32(4):416–27. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1564705.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Aviram G, Greif J, Man A, Schwarz Y, Marmor S, Graif M, Blachar A. Diagnosis of intrathoracic lesions: are sequential fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and core needle biopsy (CNB) combined better than either investigation alone? Clin Radiol. 2007;62(3):221–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shabana W, Kielar A, Vermani V, Fernandes DD, Antoniscu R, Schweitzer M. Accuracy of sonographically guided biopsy using a freehand versus needle-guided technique: computed tomographic correlation study. J Ultrasound Med. 2013;32(3):535–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim GR, Hur J, Lee SM, Lee HJ, Hong YJ, Nam JE, et al. CT fluoroscopy-guided lung biopsy versus conventional CT-guided lung biopsy: a prospective controlled study to assess radiation doses and diagnostic performance. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(2):232–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Heck SL, Blom P, Berstad A. Accuracy and complications in computed tomography fluoroscopy-guided needle biopsies of lung masses. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(6):1387–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Prosch H, Stadler A, Schilling M, Bürklin S, Eisenhuber E, Schober E, et al. CT fluoroscopy-guided vs. multislice CT biopsy mode-guided lung biopsies: accuracy, complications and radiation dose. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(5):1029–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mammarappallil JG, Hiatt KD, Ge Q, Clark HP. Computed tomography fluoroscopy versus conventional computed tomography guidance for biopsy of intrathoracic lesions: a retrospective review of 1143 consecutive procedures. J Thorac Imaging. 2014;29(6):340–3. doi:10.1097/RTI.0000000000000109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lü Y, Fritz J, Li C, Liu M, Lee P, Wu L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided percutaneous biopsy of mediastinal masses: diagnostic performance and safety. Invest Radiol. 2013;48(6):452–7. doi:10.1097/RLI.0b013e31827a4a17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Verheyden C, Pages-Bouic E, Balleyguier C, Cherel P, Lepori D, Laffargue G, et al. Underestimation rate at MR imaging-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a multi-institutional retrospective study of 1509 breast biopsies. Radiology. 2016;29:151947.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Woodrum DA, Gorny KR, Greenwood B, Mynderse LA. MRI-guided prostate biopsy of native and recurrent prostate cancer. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2016;33(3):196–205. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1586151.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Weiss CR, Nour SG, Lewin JS. MR-guided biopsy: a review of current techniques and applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27(2):311–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Muthigi A, George AK, Sidana A, Kongnyuy M, Simon R, Moreno V, et al. Missing the mark: prostate cancer upgrading by systematic biopsy over MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. J Urol. 2016;. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.097.

    Google Scholar 

  32. El-Haddad G. PET-based percutaneous needle biopsy. PET Clin. 2016;11(3):333–49. doi:10.1016/j.cpet.2016.02.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Stewart CJ, Coldewey J, Stewart IS. Comparison of fine needle aspiration cytology and needle core biopsy in the diagnosis of radiologically detected abdominal lesions. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55(2):93–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Maturen KE, Nghiem HV, Marrero JA, Hussain HK, Higgins EG, Fox GA, et al. Lack of tumor seeding of hepatocellular carcinoma after percutaneous needle biopsy using coaxial cutting needle technique. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187(5):1184–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Robertson EG, Baxter G. Tumour seeding following percutaneous needle biopsy: the real story! Clin Radiol. 2011;66(11):1007–14. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2011.05.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hatfield MK, Beres RA, Sane SS, Zaleski GX. Percutaneous imaging-guided solid organ core needle biopsy: coaxial versus noncoaxial method. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(2):413–7. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Nour-Eldin NE, Alsubhi M, Emam A, Lehnert T, Beeres M, Jacobi V, et al. Pneumothorax complicating coaxial and non-coaxial CT-guided lung biopsy: comparative analysis of determining risk factors and management of pneumothorax in a retrospective review of 650 patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(2):261–70. doi:10.1007/s00270-015-1167-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Jandaghi AB, Habibzadeh H, Falahatkar S, Heidarzadeh A, Pourghorban R. Transperineal prostate core needle biopsy: a comparison of coaxial versus noncoaxial method in a randomised trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016 Aug 2. [Epub ahead of print].

  39. Zins M, Vilgrain V, Gayno S, Rolland Y, Arrivé L, Denninger MH, et al. US-guided percutaneous liver biopsy with plugging of the needle track: a prospective study in 72 high-risk patients. Radiology. 1992;184(3):841–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tran AA, Brown SB, Rosenberg J, Hovsepian DM. Tract embolization with gelatin sponge slurry for prevention of pneumothorax after percutaneous computed tomography-guided lung biopsy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014;37(6):1546–53. doi:10.1007/s00270-013-0823-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Baadh AS, Hoffmann JC, Fadl A, Danda D, Bhat VR, Georgiou N, et al. Utilization of the track embolization technique to improve the safety of percutaneous lung biopsy and/or fiducial marker placement. Clin Imaging. 2016;40(5):1023–8. doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.06.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Li Y, Du Y, Luo TY, Yang HF, Yu JH, Xu XX, et al. Usefulness of normal saline for sealing the needle track after CT-guided lung biopsy. Clin Radiol. 2015;70(11):1192–7. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2015.06.081.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lang EK, Ghavami R, Schreiner VC, Archibald S, Ramirez J. Autologous blood clot seal to prevent pneumothorax at CT-guided lung biopsy. Radiology. 2000;216(1):93–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gupta S, Wallace MJ, Cardella JF, Kundu S, Miller DL, Rose SC. Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous needle biopsy. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21(7):969–75. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2010.01.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gupta S, Henningsen JA, Wallace MJ, Madoff DC, Morello FA Jr, Ahrar K, et al. Percutaneous biopsy of head and neck lesions with CT guidance: various approaches and relevant anatomic and technical considerations. Radiographics. 2007;27(2):371–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Learned KO, Lev-Toaff AS, Brake BJ, Wu RI, Langer JE, Loevner LA. US-guided biopsy of neck lesions: the head and neck neuroradiologist’s perspective. Radiographics. 2016;36(1):226–43. doi:10.1148/rg.2016150087.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zhang HF, Zeng XT, Xing F, Fan N, Liao MY. The diagnostic accuracy of CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy and fine needle aspiration in pulmonary lesions: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2016;71(1):e1–10. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2015.09.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gupta S, Seaberg K, Wallace MJ, Madoff DC, Morello FA Jr, Ahrar K, et al. Imaging-guided percutaneous biopsy of mediastinal lesions: different approaches and anatomic considerations. Radiographics. 2005;25(3):763–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. American association for the study of liver diseases. Liver Biopsy Hepatol. 2009;49(3):1017–44. doi:10.1002/hep.22742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kalambokis G, Manousou P, Vibhakorn S, Marelli L, Cholongitas E, Senzolo M, et al. Transjugular liver biopsy–indications, adequacy, quality of specimens, and complications–a systematic review. J Hepatol. 2007;47(2):284–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Howlett DC, Drinkwater KJ, Lawrence D, Barter S, Nicholson T. Findings of the UK national audit evaluating image-guided or image-assisted liver biopsy. Part I. Procedural aspects, diagnostic adequacy, and accuracy. Radiology. 2012;265(3):819–31. doi:10.1148/radiol.12111562.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Howlett DC, Drinkwater KJ, Lawrence D, Barter S, Nicholson T. Findings of the UK national audit evaluating image-guided or image-assisted liver biopsy. Part II. Minor and major complications and procedure-related mortality. Radiology. 2013;266(1):226–35. doi:10.1148/radiol.12120224.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lipnik AJ, Brown DB. Image-guided percutaneous abdominal mass biopsy: technical and clinical considerations. Radiol Clin North Am. 2015;53(5):1049–59. doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2015.05.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. McInnes MD, Kielar AZ, Macdonald DB. Percutaneous image-guided biopsy of the spleen: systematic review and meta-analysis of the complication rate and diagnostic accuracy. Radiology. 2011;260(3):699–708. doi:10.1148/radiol.11110333.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Rajiah P, Sinha R, Cuevas C, Dubinsky TJ, Bush WH Jr, Kolokythas O. Imaging of uncommon retroperitoneal masses. Radiographics. 2011;31(4):949–76. doi:10.1148/rg.314095132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Marconi L, Dabestani S, Lam TB, Hofmann F, Stewart F, Norrie J, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy. Eur Urol. 2016;69(4):660–73. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.072.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Bancos I, Tamhane S, Shah M, Delivanis DA, Alahdab F, Arlt W, et al. DIAGNOSIS OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: the diagnostic performance of adrenal biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Endocrinol. 2016;175(2):R65–80. doi:10.1530/EJE-16-0297.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Vanderveen KA, Thompson SM, Callstrom MR, Young WF Jr, Grant CS, Farley DR, et al. Biopsy of pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas: potential for disaster. Surgery. 2009;146(6):1158–66. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2009.09.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ukimura O, Coleman JA, de la Taille A, Emberton M, Epstein JI, Freedland SJ, et al. Contemporary role of systematic prostate biopsies: indications, techniques, and implications for patient care. Eur Urol. 2013;63(2):214–30. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.033.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Jiang X, Zhu S, Feng G, Zhang Z, Li C, Li H, et al. Is an initial saturation prostate biopsy scheme better than an extended scheme for detection of prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2013;63(6):1031–9. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.01.035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Pua BB, Solomon SB. Lymph Node Biopsy. In: Gervais DA, Sabharwal T, editors. Interventional radiology procedures in biopsy and drainage. London: Springer; 2011. p. 73–9.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Traina F, Errani C, Toscano A, Pungetti C, Fabbri D, Mazzotti A, Donati D, Faldini C. Current concepts in the biopsy of musculoskeletal tumors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(1):e7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Huang AJ, Kattapuram SV. Musculoskeletal neoplasms: biopsy and intervention. Radiol Clin North Am. 2011;49(6):1287–305. doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2011.07.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Atwell TD, Smith RL, Hesley GK, Callstrom MR, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS, et al. Incidence of bleeding after 15,181 percutaneous biopsies and the role of aspirin. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(3):784–9. doi:10.2214/AJR.08.2122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Heerink WJ, de Bock GH, de Jonge GJ, Groen HJ, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M. Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(1):138–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Moreland A, Novogrodsky E, Brody L, Durack J, Erinjeri J, Getrajdman G, et al. Pneumothorax with prolonged chest tube requirement after CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy: incidence and risk factors. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(10):3483–91. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-4200-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Wu CC, Maher MM, Shepard JA. Complications of CT-guided percutaneous needle biopsy of the chest: prevention and management. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(6):W678–82. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.4659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Tomiyama N, Yoshifumi Y, Yasuo N, et al. CT-guided needle biopsy of lung lesions: a survey of severe complications based on 9783 biopsies in Japan. Eur J Radiol. 2006;59:60–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Herts B, Baker M. The current role of percutaneous biopsy in the evaluation of renal masses. Curr Opin Urol. 2000;10:105–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Silva MA, Hegab B, Hyde C, Guo B, Buckels JA, Mirza DF. Needle track seeding following biopsy of liver lesions in the diagnosis of hepatocellular cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut. 2008;57:1592–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Stigliano R, Marelli L, Yu D, Davies N, Patch D, Burroughs AK. Seeding following percutaneous diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma: what is the risk and the outcome? Seeding risk for percutaneous approach of HCC. Cancer Treat Rev. 2007;33:437–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Rodgers M, Collinson R, Desai S, et al. Risk of dissemination with biopsy of colorectal liver metastases. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46:454–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Jones O, Rees M, John T, et al. Biopsy of resectable colorectal liver metastases causes tumour dissemination and adversely affects survival after liver resection. Br J Surg. 2005;92:1165–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Agarwal P, Seely J, Matzinger F, et al. Pleural mesothelioma: sensitivity and incidence of needle tract seeding after image-guided biopsy versus surgical biopsy. Radiology. 2006;241:589–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiology Unit, Oncology Department, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Torino, Regione Gonzole, 10, 10043, Orbassano, Turin, Italy

    Andrea Veltri

  2. Department of Interventional Radiology, Pisa University Hospital, Via Paradisa 2, 56100, Pisa, Italy

    Irene Bargellini & Luigi Giorgi

  3. Angiography Section, Radiology Department, Hospital S. Teotónio, Viseu, Portugal

    Paulo Alexandre Matos Silva Almeida

  4. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, 06100, Ankara, Turkey

    Okan Akhan

Authors
  1. Andrea Veltri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Irene Bargellini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luigi Giorgi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paulo Alexandre Matos Silva Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Okan Akhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Veltri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Appendix: SIR Classification of Complications by Outcome [3]

Appendix: SIR Classification of Complications by Outcome [3]

Minor Complications

  1. a.

    No therapy, no consequence.

  2. b.

    Nominal therapy, no consequence including overnight admission for observation only.

Major Complications

  1. c.

    Require therapy, minor hospitalization (<48 h).

  2. d.

    Require major therapy, unplanned increase in level of care, prolonged hospitalization (>48 h).

  3. e.

    Permanent adverse.

  4. f.

    Death.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Veltri, A., Bargellini, I., Giorgi, L. et al. CIRSE Guidelines on Percutaneous Needle Biopsy (PNB). Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40, 1501–1513 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-017-1658-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-017-1658-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation