TFNA is effective in distinguishing malignant lesions and determining the histopathological type of lung cancer (
2,
7,
8). Although CT-guided TFNA is a widely used, safe and practical method in diagnosing local pulmonary lesions, there is no report about the safety and diagnosis rate of repeating the procedure. We have demonstrated that procedure repetition increased the diagnostic yield without an increase in the pneumothorax rate in pulmonary lesions. The diagnostic rate of TFNA for malignant lesions ranges from 76% to 97% (
1-3). In our study, the diagnostic rate (72%) was close to the lower limit. One reason was absence of an on-site pathologist to evaluate the adequacy of the specimen. Previous studies have shown that on-site cytological assessment at the time of the procedure reduced the inadequate sampling rate, and increased the diagnostic rate of TFNA (
9,
10). Another reason was that we included only fine needle aspiration procedures, which may lead to a decrease in the diagnostic rate. It was reported that the diagnostic rate of core biopsy is higher particularly in benign lesions (
1,
11-14). In our study, while we established 165 out of the 199 malignant diagnoses with TFNA, the diagnosis rate for benign lesions was only 18% (7 out of 41 benign diagnosis). We investigated the association between some factors and the diagnostic rate in TFNA. We found only a significant inverse correlation between calcification of the lesion and the diagnosis rate. However, we could not make a conclusion about this result because of the low number of calcified lesions (17/240). We found no association between the lesion size and the diagnostic rate in our study. While some studies reported association between lesion size and diagnostic rate, some found no association (
1,
2,
15,
16). We obtained 30 additional diagnoses with the second trial of TFNA procedures in our study. As most of the diagnoses with repeated TFNA were inoperable lung cancer, usually an incurable disease, we prevented these patients from undergoing more invasive diagnostic procedures (such as mediastinoscopy and thoracotomy) by repeated TFNA. We had a diagnostic advantage with repeated TFNA with the cost of an additional six pneumothoraces (9%). Although the pneumothorax rate in the second TFNA was significantly higher than zero, it was not different from the rate of pneumothorax in the first TFNA. However, it is probable that the additional TFNA does not have a diagnostic benefit after the second TFNA. Perhaps the greatest advantage of TFNA is safety. However, pneumothorax is the most common complication associated with the TFNA biopsy. Reported rates range from 7.6% to 46% (
2,
4). The pneumothorax rate in the repeated patients of our study was nearly in the lower range of the reported rates (8%). The main reason for this low rate of pneumothorax was the choice to perform a single pass through the lesion. In the previous studies, a strong correlation was reported between pneumothorax and the size and depth of the lesion that are similar to our results (
1,
17). In our study, the pneumothorax rate that required chest tube drainage was 17% (5 out of 29 pneumothoraces). The percentage of patients requiring a chest tube after biopsy in reported previous studies varies between 3.3%-43% (
2). Up to now, many factors that might affect the pneumothorax rate have been investigated. We observed post procedure pneumothorax more frequently in heavy smokers. This result may be due to the association between the amount of smoking and the risk of emphysema. However, we cannot make such a conclusion, because respiratory function tests and presentations of emphysema were not recorded in the CT imaging of each patient. We found a significant association between pneumothorax rate and the size of the lesion and its distance from the pleura. These findings were parallel with the literature (
1,
17). There were some limitations in this study. First, it was retrospective. Second, cytological assessment was not performed at the time of the procedure. This might be the reason of high repetition procedures. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that procedure repetition improved the diagnostic yield without a significant increase in the pneumothorax rate. We consider that TFNA repetition is a safe method with an acceptable complication rate when the first biopsy is nondiagnostic.