# Effect of 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Combined with 3D-Printed Templates on Biopsy Efficacy in Patients with Lung Tumor

## TL;DR

Combining 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging with 3D-printed templates improves lung tumor biopsy efficiency without increasing complications.

## Contribution

Demonstrates that adding 3D-printed templates to PET/CT-guided biopsies reduces procedure time and number of punctures.

## Key findings

- The observation group had shorter operation times and fewer biopsies compared to the control group.
- Complication rates were lower in the group using 3D-printed templates, though not statistically significant.
- Specificity and misdiagnosis rates were similar between the two groups.

## Abstract

To investigate the effect of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging combined with 3D-printed templates on the biopsy results and diagnostic efficacy in patients with lung tumors.

This was a comparative study. A total of 80 patients with suspected lung tumors admitted to Baoding NO.1 Central Hospital from May 2022 to December 2023 were selected as the research subjects and divided into the study group and the control group per different detection methods. Patients in the control group were treated with 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging-guided percutaneous aspiration biopsy of the lung, while those in the observation group underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging-guided percutaneous aspiration biopsy of the lung combined with 3D printed templates. Afterward, the biopsy results of the two groups and their diagnostic efficacy and complications were compared.

No significant differences were observed in tissue length and scanning time between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time and number of biopsies in the observation group were less than those in the control group, with significant differences (P<0.05). Meanwhile, there was no statistically significant difference in specificity (15.00% vs. 27.50%) and misdiagnosis rate (2.50% vs. 10.00%) between the two groups (P>0.05). Moreover, the incidence of complications in the observation group was 5.00%, lower than the control group (7.50%), with no statistically significant differences (χ²=0.213, P=0.644).

The observation group was found to have superior effect than control group, with fewer punctures and shorter puncture time, making it worthy of promotion in clinical application.