Comparison of Patient's Procedural Tolerance of EBUS-TBNA Performed Through Nasal Versus Oral Route: The NO-EBUS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Abstract

Background: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a commonly performed procedure by the bronchoscopist for the evaluation of mediastinal lesions. However, evidence directly comparing the nasal and oral routes to guide the choice of an optimal insertion approach is scanty.

Methods: In this prospective, parallel-group, open-label randomized clinical trial, adults posted for a linear EBUS-TBNA examination under conscious sedation were randomized to undergo the procedure via the nasal or oral route. The primary objective was to assess the equivalence of subject-rated tolerance of EBUS-TBNA procedure in the 2 groups. Key secondary objectives were to assess the equivalence of subject-rated overall experience, willingness for a repeat procedure, operator-rated subject's tolerance, and operator-rated ease of performing the procedure.

Results: One hundred and eighty subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the nasal (n=98) or oral (n=82) group. Outcome measures were assessed by both per-protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Subject-rated procedural tolerance, overall satisfaction and operator's ease of performing the procedure were found to be equivalent in the 2 groups ( P <0.05 in all cases for PP and ITT analysis). The operator-rated subject's tolerance was, however, nonequivalent ( P =0.0596, 0.1286 for PP and ITT, respectively). Subject's willingness to undergo a repeat procedure was similar in both groups [90% CI of difference in proportions: (-0.023, 0.121) in PP and (-0.028, 0.115) in ITT analysis].

Conclusion: Nasal route for EBUS-TBNA could be considered where it is feasible and preferable for the patient as well as the operator.