Search

Background: Electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB) is a minimally invasive technology for the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary nodules. However, ENB is limited by the lack of real-time confirmation of various biopsy devices. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) could increase diagnostic yield by allowing real-time confirmation to overcome the inherent divergence of nodule location., Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic yield of ENB plus CBCT as compared with ENB alone for biopsy of peripheral lung nodules., Method: We conducted a retrospective study of patients undergoing ENB before and after the implementation of CBCT. Data from 62 consecutive patients with lung nodules located in the outer two-thirds of the lung who underwent ENB and combined ENB-CBCT were collected. Radial endobronchial ultrasound was used during all procedures as well. Diagnostic yield was defined as the presence of malignancy or benign histological findings that lead to a specific diagnosis., Results: Thirty-one patients had ENB-CBCT, and 31 patients had only ENB for peripheral lung lesions. The median size of the lesion for the ENB-CBCT group was 16 (interquartile range (IQR) 12.6-25.5) mm as compared to 21.5 (IQR 16-27) mm in the ENB group (p = 0.2). In the univariate analysis, the diagnostic yield of ENB-CBCT was 74.2% and ENB 51.6% (p = 0.05). Following multivariate regression analysis adjusting for the size of the lesion, distance from the pleura, and presence of bronchus sign, the odds ratio for the diagnostic yield was 3.4 (95% CI 1.03-11.26, p = 0.04) in the ENB-CBCT group as compared with ENB alone. The median time for the procedure was shorter in patients in the ENB-CBCT group (74 min) than in those in the ENB group (90 min) (p = 0.02). The rate of adverse events was similar in both groups (6.5%, p = 0.7)., Conclusions: The use of CBCT might increase the diagnostic yield in ENB-guided peripheral lung nodule biopsies. Future randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm such findings., (© 2021 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Spiration Valve System (SVS) is an alternative for patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema; however, data about efficacy from randomized controlled trials (RCT) are unclear., Objectives: To explore both efficacy and safety of SVS in patients with severe emphysema and hyperinflation., Methods: We included PubMed, EMBASE, Coch-rane database. All searches were performed until August 2019. Only RCTs were included for analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool. A meta-analysis evaluated change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), 6-min walking test (6MWT), residual volume, modified medical research council (mMRC) and Saint George respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ), all-cause mortality, risk of pneumothorax, and risk of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Quality of the evidence was rated using GRADE approach., Results: Four RCTs including 629 subjects were included. SVS showed an overall change of 0.03 L (-0.07 to 0.13, I2 = 90%) in the in FEV1 (L) and a 2.03% (-2.50 to 6.57, I2 = 96%) in the predicted FEV1 (%) compared to baseline; however, studies without collateral ventilation (CV) showed an improvement of 0.12 L (95% CI 0.09-0.015, I2 = 0%), This subgroup also reported better results in SGRQ -12.27 points (95% CI -15.84 to -8.70, I2 = 0%) and mMRC -0.54 (95% CI -0.74 to -0.33, I2 = 0%). We found no benefit in 6MWT mean difference = 4.56 m (95% CI -21.88 to 31.00, I2 = 73%). Relative risk of mortality was 2.54 (95% CI 0.81-7.96, I2 = 0%), for pneumothorax 3.3 (95% CI 0.61-18.12, I2 = 0%) and AECOPD 1.68 (95% CI 1.04-2.70, I2 = 0%)., Conclusion: In patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema and hyperinflation without CV, SVS is an alternative that showed an improvement in pulmonary function, quality of life, and dyspnea score with an acceptable risk profile., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Endoscopic lung volume reduction using Zephyr® valves has been recently adopted as a treatment option for patients with severe emphysema without collateral ventilation (CV)., Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of Zephyr valves in such a population., Methods: Studies were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. All searches were current until June 2018. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of Zephyr. We defined as outcome: change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), in the 6-min walking test (6MWT), in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and in residual volume (RV). Safety analysis included relative risk (RR) of pneumothorax. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE., Results: 7 RCTs reported on Zephyr valves and 5 RCTs included only patients without CV. Zephyr improved FEV1 with a mean difference (MD) of 17.36% (CI, 9.28-25.45, I2 = 78%). Subgroup analysis showed significant FEV1 improvement following Zephyr placement in patients with heterogeneous distribution: MD = 21.78% (CI, 8.70-34.86, I2 = 89%) and 16.27% (CI, 8.78-23.76, I2 = 0%) in patients with homogeneous emphysema. Studies with a follow-up of 3 months reported FEV1 MD = 17.19% (CI, 3.16-31.22, I2 = 89%) compared to studies with a follow-up of 6-12 months, which showed a consistent improvement of FEV1 MD = 17.90% (CI, 11.47-24.33, I2 = 0%). Zephyr also showed improvement of SGRQ, 6MWT, and RV. RR of pneumothorax was 6.32 (CI, 3.74-10.67, I2 = 0%)., Conclusion: In this population, Zephyr valves provided significant and clinically meaningful short-term improvements in either homogeneous or heterogeneous emphysema without CV but with an increase in adverse events., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Patients with severe symptomatic expiratory central airway collapse (ECAC) undergo a stent trial to determine whether they are candidate for tracheobronchoplasty. Most stent trials were done using silicone stents. However, there was a higher number of silicone stent-related complications., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of short-term uncovered self-expanding metallic airway stents (USEMAS) in patients with ECAC., Methods: This was a retrospective review. Baseline measurements were compared to those obtained after 7-14 days. Measurements included: Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), Cough Quality of Life Questionnaire (CQLQ), spirometry testing, and 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Stent- and procedure-related complications were reported., Results: 33 patients (median age, 52 years) underwent the USEMAS trial. Presenting symptoms were dyspnea in 100%, intractable cough in 90.3%, recurrent infection in 42.2%, and inability to clear secretions in 21.4%. Dyspnea, cough, and secretion clearance improved in 88, 70, and 57%, respectively. Overall, there was a significant improvement in mMRC (p < 0.001), CQLQ (p = 0.015), and 6MWT (p = 0.015). There was 1 airway infection, 1 stent migration, and 1 pneumothorax. The median duration of USEMAS was 7 days. All stents were removed without any complications. At the time of stent removal, no granulation tissue was observed in 30.9%, and mild granulation tissue was observed in 69.1%., Conclusion: The short-term USEMAS trial improves respiratory symptoms, quality of life, and exercise capacity with few complications in patients with severe symptomatic ECAC when performed by a multidisciplinary airway team in highly specialized centers with experience in the evaluation and treatment of this patient population., (© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.)