Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Hook-wire localization versus lipiodol localization for patients with pulmonary lesions having ground-glass opacity

Full metadata record
DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorPark, Chul Hwan-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Sang Min-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Ji Won-
dc.contributor.authorHwang, Sung Ho-
dc.contributor.authorKwon, Woocheol-
dc.contributor.authorHan, Kyunghwa-
dc.contributor.authorHur, Jin-
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-31T04:42:05Z-
dc.date.available2021-08-31T04:42:05Z-
dc.date.created2021-06-19-
dc.date.issued2020-04-
dc.identifier.issn0022-5223-
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/56730-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Accurate and safe preoperative localization is useful for video-assisted thoracic surgery of small pulmonary lesions with ground-glass opacity (GGO). However, the optimal localization method is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the usefulness and safety of the lipiodol and hook-wire localization techniques for video-assisted thoracic surgery of GGO lesions. Methods: This prospective, non-randomized comparative study was conducted between April 2014 and December 2016 at 8 qualifying university teaching hospitals. Two-hundred-fifty patients with pulmonary lesions having GGO were included. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the lipiodol (n = 125, 4 hospitals) or hook-wire group (n = 125, 4 hospitals) for preoperative localization procedures. Participants underwent preoperative localization via the lipiodol or hook-wire technique followed by thoracoscopic surgery. The primary endpoint was the procedure success rate. Results: The procedure success rates (hook-wire vs lipiodol group) were 94.40% versus 99.16% (P = .08). Localization-related complications occurred in 53.60% versus 48.33% of patients (P = .49). Hemorrhage rates were significantly greater in the hook-wire group than in the lipiodol group (21.6% vs 5.83%, P < .001). The lipiodol procedure time was significantly longer than that of the hook-wire technique (20.69 +/- 9.34 vs 17.15 +/- 7.91 minutes, P = .001). The initially positive surgical resection margin was significantly greater in the hook-wire group than in the lipiodol group (10.89% vs 2.38%, P = .02). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in success rate between the hook-wire and lipiodol methods. However, the hemorrhage rate was significantly greater in the hook-wire group, whereas the hook-wire group showed greater initially positive surgical resection margins.-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherMOSBY-ELSEVIER-
dc.subjectASSISTED THORACOSCOPIC SURGERY-
dc.subjectDOSE COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY-
dc.subjectLUNG-CANCER-
dc.subjectSUBLOBAR RESECTION-
dc.subjectNATURAL-HISTORY-
dc.subjectNODULES-
dc.subjectCLASSIFICATION-
dc.subjectADENOCARCINOMA-
dc.subjectRECURRENCE-
dc.subjectMARGIN-
dc.titleHook-wire localization versus lipiodol localization for patients with pulmonary lesions having ground-glass opacity-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorHwang, Sung Ho-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.08.100-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85073162633-
dc.identifier.wosid000520839700116-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, v.159, no.4, pp.1571 - +-
dc.relation.isPartOfJOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY-
dc.citation.titleJOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY-
dc.citation.volume159-
dc.citation.number4-
dc.citation.startPage1571-
dc.citation.endPage+-
dc.type.rimsART-
dc.type.docTypeArticle-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscie-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscopus-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaCardiovascular System & Cardiology-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaRespiratory System-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaSurgery-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryCardiac & Cardiovascular Systems-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryRespiratory System-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategorySurgery-
dc.subject.keywordPlusASSISTED THORACOSCOPIC SURGERY-
dc.subject.keywordPlusDOSE COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY-
dc.subject.keywordPlusLUNG-CANCER-
dc.subject.keywordPlusSUBLOBAR RESECTION-
dc.subject.keywordPlusNATURAL-HISTORY-
dc.subject.keywordPlusNODULES-
dc.subject.keywordPlusCLASSIFICATION-
dc.subject.keywordPlusADENOCARCINOMA-
dc.subject.keywordPlusRECURRENCE-
dc.subject.keywordPlusMARGIN-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorground-glass opacity-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorlocalization-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorlipiodol-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorhook-wire-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorvideo-assisted thoracic surgery-
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
College of Medicine > Department of Medical Science > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE