Diagnostic Accuracy and Safety of Nonsurgical Biopsy for Diagnosing Pulmonary Ground-Glass Opacities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Respiration Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-29 DOI:10.1159/000539876
Mengyun Zhou, Meng Zhang, Zhou Jin, Xiang Zhao, Kunyao Yu, Junfang Huang, Guangfa Wang, Yuan Cheng
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy and Safety of Nonsurgical Biopsy for Diagnosing Pulmonary Ground-Glass Opacities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mengyun Zhou, Meng Zhang, Zhou Jin, Xiang Zhao, Kunyao Yu, Junfang Huang, Guangfa Wang, Yuan Cheng","doi":"10.1159/000539876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Previous meta-analyses have explored the diagnostic accuracy and safety of computed tomography-guided percutaneous lung biopsy of ground-glass opacities (GGOs). However, no research investigated the role of nonsurgical biopsies (including transbronchial approaches). Additionally, studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of GGOs with different characteristics are scarce, with no quantitative assessment published to date. We performed a systematic review to explore the diagnostic accuracy and safety of nonsurgical biopsy for diagnosing GGOs, especially those with higher ground-glass components and smaller nodule sizes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thorough literature search of four databases was performed to compile studies evaluating both or either of the diagnostic accuracy and complications of nonsurgical biopsy for GGOs. A bivariate random-effects model and random-effect model were utilized for data synthesis. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen eligible studies with a total of 1,379 biopsy-sampled lesions were analyzed, of which 1,124 were confirmed to be malignant. Nonsurgical biopsy reported a pooled sensitivity of 0.89, a specificity of 0.99, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 60.3%. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and NPV of nonsurgical biopsy for diagnosing GGOs according to GGO component were 0.90, 0.99, and 77.2% in pure GGOs; 0.87, 0.99, and 67.2% in GG-predominant lesions; and 0.89, 1.00, and 44.1% in solid-predominant lesions, respectively. Additionally, the diagnostic sensitivity was better in lesions ≥20 mm than in small lesions (0.95 vs. 0.88). Factors that contributed to higher sensitivity were the use of a coaxial needle system and CT fluoroscopy but not the needle gauge. The summary sensitivity of core needle biopsy (CNB) was not significantly higher than fine needle aspiration (FNA) (0.92 vs. 0.84; p = 0.42); however, we found an increased incidence of hemorrhage in CNB compared with FNA (60.9 vs. 14.2%; p = 0.012).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nonsurgical biopsy for diagnosing GGOs shows high sensitivity and specificity with an acceptably low risk of complications. However, negative biopsy results are unreliable in excluding malignancy, necessitating resampling or subsequent follow-up. The applicability of our study is limited due to significant heterogeneity, indirect comparisons, and the paucity of data on bronchoscopic approaches, restricting the generalizability of our findings to patients requiring transbronchial biopsies.</p>","PeriodicalId":21048,"journal":{"name":"Respiration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiration","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539876","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Previous meta-analyses have explored the diagnostic accuracy and safety of computed tomography-guided percutaneous lung biopsy of ground-glass opacities (GGOs). However, no research investigated the role of nonsurgical biopsies (including transbronchial approaches). Additionally, studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of GGOs with different characteristics are scarce, with no quantitative assessment published to date. We performed a systematic review to explore the diagnostic accuracy and safety of nonsurgical biopsy for diagnosing GGOs, especially those with higher ground-glass components and smaller nodule sizes.

Methods: A thorough literature search of four databases was performed to compile studies evaluating both or either of the diagnostic accuracy and complications of nonsurgical biopsy for GGOs. A bivariate random-effects model and random-effect model were utilized for data synthesis. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.

Results: Nineteen eligible studies with a total of 1,379 biopsy-sampled lesions were analyzed, of which 1,124 were confirmed to be malignant. Nonsurgical biopsy reported a pooled sensitivity of 0.89, a specificity of 0.99, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 60.3%. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and NPV of nonsurgical biopsy for diagnosing GGOs according to GGO component were 0.90, 0.99, and 77.2% in pure GGOs; 0.87, 0.99, and 67.2% in GG-predominant lesions; and 0.89, 1.00, and 44.1% in solid-predominant lesions, respectively. Additionally, the diagnostic sensitivity was better in lesions ≥20 mm than in small lesions (0.95 vs. 0.88). Factors that contributed to higher sensitivity were the use of a coaxial needle system and CT fluoroscopy but not the needle gauge. The summary sensitivity of core needle biopsy (CNB) was not significantly higher than fine needle aspiration (FNA) (0.92 vs. 0.84; p = 0.42); however, we found an increased incidence of hemorrhage in CNB compared with FNA (60.9 vs. 14.2%; p = 0.012).

Conclusion: Nonsurgical biopsy for diagnosing GGOs shows high sensitivity and specificity with an acceptably low risk of complications. However, negative biopsy results are unreliable in excluding malignancy, necessitating resampling or subsequent follow-up. The applicability of our study is limited due to significant heterogeneity, indirect comparisons, and the paucity of data on bronchoscopic approaches, restricting the generalizability of our findings to patients requiring transbronchial biopsies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
诊断肺磨玻璃不透明的非手术活检的诊断准确性和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析。
引言 以前的荟萃分析探讨了计算机断层扫描引导下经皮肺活组织检查磨玻璃不透明(GGOs)的诊断准确性和安全性。然而,还没有研究对非手术活检(包括经支气管方法)的作用进行调查。此外,报告不同特征的 GGOs 诊断准确性的研究也很少,迄今为止还没有发表过定量评估。我们进行了一项系统性综述,探讨非手术活检诊断 GGO 的准确性和安全性,尤其是那些磨玻璃成分较高和结节尺寸较小的 GGO。方法 对四个数据库进行了全面的文献检索,汇编了对 GGOs 非手术活检的诊断准确性和并发症进行评估的研究。数据综合采用了双变量随机效应模型和随机效应模型。根据诊断准确性研究质量评估工具(Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2)对研究的方法学质量进行评估。结果 分析了19项符合条件的研究,共采集了1,379个活检样本病灶,其中1,124个病灶被证实为恶性。非手术活检的综合敏感性为 0.89,特异性为 0.99,阴性预测值 (NPV) 为 60.3%。在纯GGOs中,非手术活检根据GGO成分诊断GGOs的总体敏感性、特异性和NPV分别为0.90、0.99和77.2%;在GG为主的病变中分别为0.87、0.99和67.2%;在实变为主的病变中分别为0.89、1.00和44.1%。此外,≥20 毫米病变的诊断灵敏度高于小病变(0.95 vs 0.88)。灵敏度较高的因素是使用同轴针系统和CT透视,而不是针规。核心针活检(CNB)的灵敏度总和并未显著高于细针穿刺(FNA)(0.92 vs 0.84;P = 0.42);但我们发现,与 FNA 相比,CNB 的出血发生率更高(60.9% vs 14.2%;P = 0.012)。结论 用于诊断 GGOs 的非手术活检具有较高的灵敏度和特异性,并发症风险较低。然而,阴性活检结果在排除恶性肿瘤方面并不可靠,需要重新取样或进行后续随访。由于存在明显的异质性、间接比较以及支气管镜方法的数据较少,我们的研究适用性受到限制,因此我们的研究结果无法推广到需要经支气管活检的患者中。试验登记:PROSPERO;编号:CRD42023429977;URL:www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Respiration
Respiration 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
5.40%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Respiration'' brings together the results of both clinical and experimental investigations on all aspects of the respiratory system in health and disease. Clinical improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of chest and lung diseases are covered, as are the latest findings in physiology, biochemistry, pathology, immunology and pharmacology. The journal includes classic features such as editorials that accompany original articles in clinical and basic science research, reviews and letters to the editor. Further sections are: Technical Notes, The Eye Catcher, What’s Your Diagnosis?, The Opinion Corner, New Drugs in Respiratory Medicine, New Insights from Clinical Practice and Guidelines. ''Respiration'' is the official journal of the Swiss Society for Pneumology (SGP) and also home to the European Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP), which occupies a dedicated section on Interventional Pulmonology in the journal. This modern mix of different features and a stringent peer-review process by a dedicated editorial board make ''Respiration'' a complete guide to progress in thoracic medicine.
期刊最新文献
Poor correlation between diaphragm ultrasound and invasive gold standard technique derived respiratory muscle strength assessment in patients after hospitalization for COVID-19. A multidimensional approach to the management of patients in prolonged weaning from mechanical ventilation - the concept of treatable traits - a narrative review. Successful endobronchial valve placement in the treatment of persistent bronchopleural fistula and empyema allows the avoidance of right completion pneumonectomy. A High-Intensity versus Moderate-Intensity exercise training program in Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency-related COPD (IMAC): a randomized, controlled trial. Mastery Learning Guided by Artificial Intelligence Is Superior to Directed Self-Regulated Learning in Flexible Bronchoscopy Training: An RCT.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1