Journal of Bronchology & Interventional Pulmonology最新文献

Background: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) has become standard for the diagnosis of lung cancer, and there is an increasing need for procedural competence in trainees. We evaluate a low-cost, gelatin-based EBUS-TBNA training simulator to assess pulmonary fellows' baseline skills and facilitate procedural development.

Methods: A low-cost ($30) gelatin-based, high-fidelity simulator was created to represent the airways, major vessels, and lymph node stations essential to identify for EBUS-TBNA. Trainees had a baseline skills assessment using the simulator and were then provided a 1-hour didactic session on EBUS-TBNA and additional practice time with the simulator. Trainees then underwent a postsimulation skills assessment using a modified endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-Skills and Tasks Assessment Tool (STAT) performance assessment tool. Simulator fidelity and trainee procedural confidence was assessed using a 10-point scale.

Results: Ten fellows received training on the EBUS-TBNA simulator. First-year trainees scored the lowest on the 18-point performance scale with a mean score of 9, while third-year trainees scored highest with a mean score of 17.5. Mean 18-point performance score improvement after simulator training and didactics was 4.31 points for all trainees with the largest change in first-year trainees amounting to 8.25 points. First-year trainees experienced the greatest improvement in EBUS procedural confidence by a mean of 2.5 points on a 10-point confidence survey.

Conclusion: A low-cost EBUS simulator effectively differentiated early and advanced learners based on graded procedural performance scores. Simulation-based practice significantly improved learners' procedural performance, and the degree of improvement correlated with learner inexperience. The simulation significantly increased early learner confidence in EBUS-TBNA technique.

Background: Ensuring adequate patient comfort is crucial during bronchoscopy. Although lidocaine spray is recommended for topical pharyngeal anesthesia, the optimum dose of sprays is unclear. We compared 5 versus 10 sprays of 10% lidocaine for topical anesthesia during bronchoscopy.

Methods: In this investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial, subjects were randomized to receive 5 (group A) or 10 sprays (group B) of 10% lidocaine. The primary objective was to compare the operator-rated overall procedure satisfaction between the groups.

Results: Two hundred eighty-four subjects were randomized (143 group A and 141 group B). The operator-rated overall procedure satisfaction, VAS [mean (SD)] was similar between the groups [group A, 74.1 (19.9) and group B, 74.3 (18.5), P =0.93]. The VAS scores of patient-rated cough [group A, 32.5 (22.9) and group B, 32.3 (22.2), P =0.93], and operator-rated cough [group A, 29.8 (22.3) and group B, 26.9 (21.5), P =0.26] were also similar. The time to reach vocal cords, overall procedure duration, mean doses of sedatives, the proportion of subjects willing to return for a repeat procedure (if required), and complications were not significantly different. Subjects in group A received significantly less cumulative lidocaine (mg) [group A, 293.9 (11.6) and group B, 343.5 (10.6), P <0.001].

Conclusion: During bronchoscopy, topical anesthesia with 5 sprays of 10% lidocaine is preferred as it is associated with a similar operator-rated overall procedure satisfaction at a lower cumulative lidocaine dose compared with 10 sprays.

Background: In locoregional esophageal carcinoma (EC), airway involvement is the most common route of extraesophageal metastasis. The prognosis remains poor even with a multimodality approach. Although airway stenting is well known for restoration of the airway, the survival benefit is still lacking.

Methods: A total of 37 of patients with airway involvement from EC who underwent airway stenting at a single institution from 2015 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Survival curves after stent placement among different groups were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method.

Results: Of 37 patients, 34 were male, and the mean age was 58.9 years (42 to 80). EC was commonly located at midesophagus (51.4%). The site of airway involvement was left main bronchus (48.6%), trachea (32.4%), multiple sites (16.2%), and right main bronchus (2.7%). The nature of airway involvement was tumor invasion (91.9%), compression (62.2%), and fistula (37.8%). Twenty-three patients (62.2%) had airway involvement at the time of esophageal cancer diagnosis. Only 4 patients underwent esophageal stenting. The median survival time after stent placement was 97 days (5 to 539). Chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy were given before stent placement in 18 patients (48.6%). Treatment-naive before airway stenting and diagnosis of airway involvement at the same time of EC diagnosis were independent predictors for the increased survival after stent placement ( P <0.05). Poststent treatment was associated with improved survival ( P =0.002).

Conclusion: In patients with malignant airway involvement from EC who underwent airway stenting, the prognostic predictors for improved survival were treatment-naive status, receiving treatment after airway stenting, and early-onset of airway involvement.

Background: Severe excessive dynamic airway collapse (EDAC) is defined as airway narrowing due to posterior wall protrusion into the airway lumen, >90%. We aimed to establish an overall severity score to assess severe EDAC and the need for subsequent intervention.

Methods: A retrospective study of patients who underwent dynamic bronchoscopy for evaluation of expiratory central airway collapse between January 2019 and July 2021. A numerical value was given to each tracheobronchial segmental collapse: 0 points (<70%), 1 point (70% to 79%), 2 points (80% to 89%), and 3 points (>90%) to be added for an overall EDAC severity score per patient. We compared the score among patients who underwent stent trials (severe EDAC) and those who did not. Based on the receiver operating characteristics curve, a cutoff total score to predict severe EDAC was calculated.

Results: One hundred fifty-eight patients were included. Patients were divided into severe (n = 60) and nonsevere (n = 98) EDAC. A cutoff of 9 as the total score had a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 74% to predict severe EDAC, based on an area under the curve 0.888 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.93; P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Our EDAC Severity Scoring System was able to discern between severe and nonsevere EDAC by an overall score cutoff of 9, with high sensitivity and specificity for predicting severe disease and the need for further intervention, in our institution.

Diagnostic testing is fundamental to medicine. However, studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine vary significantly in terms of their methodology, definitions, and reporting of results. This has led to often conflicting or ambiguous results. To address this issue, a group of 20 respiratory journal editors worked to develop reporting standards for studies of diagnostic testing based on a rigorous methodology to guide authors, peer reviewers, and researchers when conducting studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine. Four key areas are covered, including defining the reference standard of truth, measures of dichotomous test performance when used for dichotomous outcomes, measures of multichotomous test performance for dichotomous outcomes, and what constitutes a useful definition of diagnostic yield. The importance of using contingency tables for reporting results is addressed with examples from the literature. A practical checklist is provided as well for reporting studies of diagnostic testing.