肺部疾病重复支气管镜检查的诊断率和安全性:五年回顾性分析

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Respiratory medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-31 DOI:10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107759
{"title":"肺部疾病重复支气管镜检查的诊断率和安全性:五年回顾性分析","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>In this study, we aim to analyze the frequency and indications of repeat bronchoscopic procedures performed at our hospital over a five-year period.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Akdeniz University, and included patients who underwent bronchoscopy between January 1, 2018, and May 31, 2024. Patients who required a repeat bronchoscopy were identified. Inclusion criteria for the repeat bronchoscopy group were non-diagnostic initial bronchoscopy or the need for additional samples for molecular testing in lung cancer patients. Exclusion criteria included patients with incomplete medical records or those who did not provide informed consent for the repeat procedure.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>A total of 3877 patients underwent bronchoscopy in this time periods. Among these, 69 patients (1.8 %) required a repeat bronchoscopy. The mean age of these patients was 61.3 ± 11.7 years, with 54 (78 %) being male. The most common reason for the repeat procedure was the non-diagnostic outcome of the initial bronchoscopy (n = 53, 77 %), followed by cases where the initial bronchoscopy was diagnostic for lung cancer but insufficient for molecular testing (n = 16, 23 %). Among the 16 patients who underwent molecular testing, sufficient samples for molecular tests were obtained in 12 patients (75 %) following the second bronchoscopy. Molecular tests were negative for driver mutations in 6 patients, while 6 patients tested positive (PD-L1, n = 5; EGFR, n = 1). In 4 patients (25 %), the sample was reported as insufficient for molecular testing. Patients who underwent repeat bronchoscopy had the second procedure an average of 38.5 ± 59.7 days after the initial procedure. No complications developed in patients undergoing repeat bronchoscopy, except for bleeding not requiring intervention related to the bronchoscopy procedure.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In conclusion, regardless of the reason, repeated bronchoscopy in suitable patients is safe and has a high diagnostic yield.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21057,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic yield and safety of repeat bronchoscopy in pulmonary disease: A five-year retrospective analysis\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107759\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>In this study, we aim to analyze the frequency and indications of repeat bronchoscopic procedures performed at our hospital over a five-year period.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Akdeniz University, and included patients who underwent bronchoscopy between January 1, 2018, and May 31, 2024. Patients who required a repeat bronchoscopy were identified. Inclusion criteria for the repeat bronchoscopy group were non-diagnostic initial bronchoscopy or the need for additional samples for molecular testing in lung cancer patients. Exclusion criteria included patients with incomplete medical records or those who did not provide informed consent for the repeat procedure.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>A total of 3877 patients underwent bronchoscopy in this time periods. Among these, 69 patients (1.8 %) required a repeat bronchoscopy. The mean age of these patients was 61.3 ± 11.7 years, with 54 (78 %) being male. The most common reason for the repeat procedure was the non-diagnostic outcome of the initial bronchoscopy (n = 53, 77 %), followed by cases where the initial bronchoscopy was diagnostic for lung cancer but insufficient for molecular testing (n = 16, 23 %). Among the 16 patients who underwent molecular testing, sufficient samples for molecular tests were obtained in 12 patients (75 %) following the second bronchoscopy. Molecular tests were negative for driver mutations in 6 patients, while 6 patients tested positive (PD-L1, n = 5; EGFR, n = 1). In 4 patients (25 %), the sample was reported as insufficient for molecular testing. Patients who underwent repeat bronchoscopy had the second procedure an average of 38.5 ± 59.7 days after the initial procedure. No complications developed in patients undergoing repeat bronchoscopy, except for bleeding not requiring intervention related to the bronchoscopy procedure.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In conclusion, regardless of the reason, repeated bronchoscopy in suitable patients is safe and has a high diagnostic yield.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respiratory medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respiratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611124002348\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611124002348","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在这项研究中,我们旨在分析我院五年内重复进行支气管镜手术的频率和适应症:这项回顾性研究在阿克登尼兹大学肺病系进行,纳入了 2018 年 1 月 1 日至 2024 年 5 月 31 日期间接受支气管镜检查的患者。研究确定了需要再次接受支气管镜检查的患者。重复支气管镜检查组的纳入标准为初次支气管镜检查未确诊或需要额外样本进行分子检测的肺癌患者。排除标准包括医疗记录不完整的患者或未就重复检查提供知情同意书的患者:在此期间,共有 3877 名患者接受了支气管镜检查。其中,69 名患者(1.8%)需要再次接受支气管镜检查。这些患者的平均年龄为(61.3 ± 11.7)岁,其中 54 人(78%)为男性。重复检查最常见的原因是初次支气管镜检查未确诊(53 人,占 77%),其次是初次支气管镜检查确诊肺癌,但分子检测结果不充分(16 人,占 23%)。在接受分子检测的16名患者中,有12名患者(75%)在第二次支气管镜检查后获得了足够的分子检测样本。分子检测结果显示,6 名患者的驱动基因突变呈阴性,6 名患者呈阳性(PD-L1,5 人;表皮生长因子受体(EGFR),1 人)。4名患者(25%)的样本被报告为不足以进行分子检测。接受重复支气管镜检查的患者平均在首次检查后(38.5 ± 59.7)天进行第二次检查。除了与支气管镜检查无关的出血外,接受重复支气管镜检查的患者均未出现并发症:总之,无论出于何种原因,对合适的患者进行重复支气管镜检查都是安全的,而且诊断率高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Diagnostic yield and safety of repeat bronchoscopy in pulmonary disease: A five-year retrospective analysis

Aim

In this study, we aim to analyze the frequency and indications of repeat bronchoscopic procedures performed at our hospital over a five-year period.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Akdeniz University, and included patients who underwent bronchoscopy between January 1, 2018, and May 31, 2024. Patients who required a repeat bronchoscopy were identified. Inclusion criteria for the repeat bronchoscopy group were non-diagnostic initial bronchoscopy or the need for additional samples for molecular testing in lung cancer patients. Exclusion criteria included patients with incomplete medical records or those who did not provide informed consent for the repeat procedure.

Findings

A total of 3877 patients underwent bronchoscopy in this time periods. Among these, 69 patients (1.8 %) required a repeat bronchoscopy. The mean age of these patients was 61.3 ± 11.7 years, with 54 (78 %) being male. The most common reason for the repeat procedure was the non-diagnostic outcome of the initial bronchoscopy (n = 53, 77 %), followed by cases where the initial bronchoscopy was diagnostic for lung cancer but insufficient for molecular testing (n = 16, 23 %). Among the 16 patients who underwent molecular testing, sufficient samples for molecular tests were obtained in 12 patients (75 %) following the second bronchoscopy. Molecular tests were negative for driver mutations in 6 patients, while 6 patients tested positive (PD-L1, n = 5; EGFR, n = 1). In 4 patients (25 %), the sample was reported as insufficient for molecular testing. Patients who underwent repeat bronchoscopy had the second procedure an average of 38.5 ± 59.7 days after the initial procedure. No complications developed in patients undergoing repeat bronchoscopy, except for bleeding not requiring intervention related to the bronchoscopy procedure.

Conclusion

In conclusion, regardless of the reason, repeated bronchoscopy in suitable patients is safe and has a high diagnostic yield.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Respiratory medicine
Respiratory medicine 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
199
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Respiratory Medicine is an internationally-renowned journal devoted to the rapid publication of clinically-relevant respiratory medicine research. It combines cutting-edge original research with state-of-the-art reviews dealing with all aspects of respiratory diseases and therapeutic interventions. Topics include adult and paediatric medicine, epidemiology, immunology and cell biology, physiology, occupational disorders, and the role of allergens and pollutants. Respiratory Medicine is increasingly the journal of choice for publication of phased trial work, commenting on effectiveness, dosage and methods of action.
期刊最新文献
Understanding the acceptability of the changing model of care in cystic fibrosis Efficacy of balloon pulmonary angioplasty in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary disease and exercise pulmonary hypertension Epistaxis in COVID positive ICU patients, implications, and future interventions Prognostic Role of Pleural Fluid SUVpeak Value obtained from 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with Malignant Pleural Effusion. β-Blockers and Asthma: Surprising findings from the FAERS database
×
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