The impact of quantitative platform on candidacy for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: a multi-center retrospective cohort study.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory Disease Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/17534666251314724
Max Wayne, Suchitra Pilli, Hee Jae Choi, Nathaniel Moulton, Praveen Chenna, Allen Cole Burks, Alexander Chen
{"title":"The impact of quantitative platform on candidacy for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: a multi-center retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Max Wayne, Suchitra Pilli, Hee Jae Choi, Nathaniel Moulton, Praveen Chenna, Allen Cole Burks, Alexander Chen","doi":"10.1177/17534666251314724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) can be an effective treatment for highly selected patients with severe emphysema but only half of carefully selected patients derive clinical benefit. Two commercially available platforms exist to help determine candidacy for BLVR via quantitative analysis of computed tomography (CT) scans.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine if the two commercially available quantitative platforms identified the same patient population that may benefit from BLVR.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A multicenter, retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive patients referred for BLVR between January 1, 2022 and March 31, 2023 at three medical centers in the United States with the same CT scan submitted for quantitative analysis to two commercially available platforms to determine BLVR candidacy were analyzed. The primary outcome of interest was whether quantitative analysis provided different recommendations for individual patients. The recommendation to proceed with BLVR was based on a prespecified algorithm using criteria established in clinical trials for each quantitative platform, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 83 patients referred for BLVR across three centers were included; patients were a median 67 years old, had a median post bronchodilator FEV1 of 30% predicted (IQR: 25, 38), a median residual volume of 220% predicted (IQR: 185, 268), and 29 (34.9%) received endobronchial valves. A total of 26 patients (31.3%) received different recommendations from the two quantitative platforms.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this cohort of patients evaluated for BLVR across multiple medical centers, nearly a third of patients received different recommendations based on the platform utilized for valve assessment. This suggests that the selection process for BLVR may warrant refinement.</p>","PeriodicalId":22884,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory Disease","volume":"19 ","pages":"17534666251314724"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11783484/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17534666251314724","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) can be an effective treatment for highly selected patients with severe emphysema but only half of carefully selected patients derive clinical benefit. Two commercially available platforms exist to help determine candidacy for BLVR via quantitative analysis of computed tomography (CT) scans.

Objectives: To determine if the two commercially available quantitative platforms identified the same patient population that may benefit from BLVR.

Design: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

Methods: Consecutive patients referred for BLVR between January 1, 2022 and March 31, 2023 at three medical centers in the United States with the same CT scan submitted for quantitative analysis to two commercially available platforms to determine BLVR candidacy were analyzed. The primary outcome of interest was whether quantitative analysis provided different recommendations for individual patients. The recommendation to proceed with BLVR was based on a prespecified algorithm using criteria established in clinical trials for each quantitative platform, respectively.

Results: A total of 83 patients referred for BLVR across three centers were included; patients were a median 67 years old, had a median post bronchodilator FEV1 of 30% predicted (IQR: 25, 38), a median residual volume of 220% predicted (IQR: 185, 268), and 29 (34.9%) received endobronchial valves. A total of 26 patients (31.3%) received different recommendations from the two quantitative platforms.

Conclusion: In this cohort of patients evaluated for BLVR across multiple medical centers, nearly a third of patients received different recommendations based on the platform utilized for valve assessment. This suggests that the selection process for BLVR may warrant refinement.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory Disease delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of respiratory disease.
期刊最新文献
Potential of phosphodiesterase 4B inhibition in the treatment of progressive pulmonary fibrosis. A real-world study to evaluate effectiveness of mepolizumab in treating severe asthma in Taiwan (REMIT). Association between albumin corrected anion gap and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Sleep and breathing in children with Joubert syndrome and a review of other rare congenital hindbrain malformations. The impact of quantitative platform on candidacy for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: a multi-center retrospective cohort study.
×
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