锥束增强荧光镜和超薄支气管镜与常规导航支气管镜技术的诊断率。

David M DiBardino, Roger Y Kim, Yulei Cao, Michelle Andronov, Anthony R Lanfranco, Andrew R Haas, Anil Vachani, Kevin C Ma, Christoph T Hutchinson
{"title":"锥束增强荧光镜和超薄支气管镜与常规导航支气管镜技术的诊断率。","authors":"David M DiBardino, Roger Y Kim, Yulei Cao, Michelle Andronov, Anthony R Lanfranco, Andrew R Haas, Anil Vachani, Kevin C Ma, Christoph T Hutchinson","doi":"10.1097/LBR.0000000000000883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pulmonary nodules suspicious for lung cancer are frequently diagnosed. Evaluating and optimizing the diagnostic yield of lung nodule biopsy is critical as innovation in bronchoscopy continues to progress.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort study. Consecutive patients undergoing guided bronchoscopy for suspicious pulmonary nodule(s) between February 2020 and July 2021 were included. The cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)+ radial endobronchial ultrasound (r-EBUS) group had their procedure using CBCT-derived augmented fluoroscopy along with r-EBUS. The CBCT+ ultrathin bronchoscope (UTB)+r-EBUS group had the same procedure but with the use of an ultrathin bronchoscope. The r-EBUS group underwent r-EBUS guidance without CBCT or augmented fluoroscopy. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare diagnostic yield, adjusting for confounding variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 116 patients were included. The median pulmonary lesion diameter was 19.5 mm (interquartile range, 15.0 to 27.5 mm), and 91 (78.4%) were in the peripheral half of the lung. Thirty patients (25.9%) underwent CBCT+UTB, 27 (23.3%) CBCT, and 59 (50.9%) r-EBUS alone with unadjusted diagnostic yields of 86.7%, 70.4%, and 42.4%, respectively ( P <0.001). The adjusted diagnostic yields were 85.0% (95% CI, 68.6% to 100%), 68.3% (95% CI, 50.1% to 86.6%), and 44.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 58.0%), respectively. There was significantly more virtual navigational bronchoscopy use in the r-EBUS group (45.8%) compared with the CBCT+UTB (13.3%) and CBCT (18.5%) groups, respectively. CBCT procedures required dose area product radiation doses of 7602.5 µGym 2 .</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with the r-EBUS group, CBCT + UTB + r-EBUS was associated with higher navigational success, fewer nondiagnostic biopsy results, and a higher diagnostic yield. CBCT procedures are associated with a considerable radiation dose.</p>","PeriodicalId":15268,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bronchology & Interventional Pulmonology","volume":" ","pages":"335-345"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/65/e6/lbr-30-335.PMC10538603.pdf","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Yield of Cone-beam-Derived Augmented Fluoroscopy and Ultrathin Bronchoscopy Versus Conventional Navigational Bronchoscopy Techniques.\",\"authors\":\"David M DiBardino, Roger Y Kim, Yulei Cao, Michelle Andronov, Anthony R Lanfranco, Andrew R Haas, Anil Vachani, Kevin C Ma, Christoph T Hutchinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/LBR.0000000000000883\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pulmonary nodules suspicious for lung cancer are frequently diagnosed. Evaluating and optimizing the diagnostic yield of lung nodule biopsy is critical as innovation in bronchoscopy continues to progress.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort study. Consecutive patients undergoing guided bronchoscopy for suspicious pulmonary nodule(s) between February 2020 and July 2021 were included. The cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)+ radial endobronchial ultrasound (r-EBUS) group had their procedure using CBCT-derived augmented fluoroscopy along with r-EBUS. The CBCT+ ultrathin bronchoscope (UTB)+r-EBUS group had the same procedure but with the use of an ultrathin bronchoscope. The r-EBUS group underwent r-EBUS guidance without CBCT or augmented fluoroscopy. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare diagnostic yield, adjusting for confounding variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 116 patients were included. The median pulmonary lesion diameter was 19.5 mm (interquartile range, 15.0 to 27.5 mm), and 91 (78.4%) were in the peripheral half of the lung. Thirty patients (25.9%) underwent CBCT+UTB, 27 (23.3%) CBCT, and 59 (50.9%) r-EBUS alone with unadjusted diagnostic yields of 86.7%, 70.4%, and 42.4%, respectively ( P <0.001). The adjusted diagnostic yields were 85.0% (95% CI, 68.6% to 100%), 68.3% (95% CI, 50.1% to 86.6%), and 44.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 58.0%), respectively. There was significantly more virtual navigational bronchoscopy use in the r-EBUS group (45.8%) compared with the CBCT+UTB (13.3%) and CBCT (18.5%) groups, respectively. CBCT procedures required dose area product radiation doses of 7602.5 µGym 2 .</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with the r-EBUS group, CBCT + UTB + r-EBUS was associated with higher navigational success, fewer nondiagnostic biopsy results, and a higher diagnostic yield. CBCT procedures are associated with a considerable radiation dose.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bronchology & Interventional Pulmonology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"335-345\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/65/e6/lbr-30-335.PMC10538603.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bronchology & Interventional Pulmonology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/LBR.0000000000000883\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bronchology & Interventional Pulmonology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/LBR.0000000000000883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

背景:怀疑为癌症的肺结节是常见的诊断。随着支气管镜检查的不断创新,评估和优化肺结节活检的诊断效果至关重要。方法:这是一项回顾性队列研究。包括2020年2月至2021年7月期间连续接受可疑肺结节引导支气管镜检查的患者。锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)+径向支气管内超声(r-EBUS)组使用CBCT衍生的增强荧光镜检查和r-EBUS进行手术。CBCT+超薄支气管镜(UTB)+r-EBUS组采用相同的程序,但使用超薄支气管镜。r-EBUS组在没有CBCT或增强荧光镜检查的情况下接受r-EBUS引导。我们使用多变量逻辑回归来比较诊断结果,并对混杂变量进行调整。结果:共纳入116例患者。肺部病变的中位直径为19.5毫米(四分位间距为15.0至27.5毫米),91(78.4%)位于肺的外周半部。30名患者(25.9%)接受CBCT+UTB,27名患者(23.3%)接受CBCT,59名患者(50.9%)单独接受r-EBUS,未经调整的诊断率分别为86.7%、70.4%和42.4%,结论:与r-EBUS组相比,CBCT+UTB+r-EBUS具有更高的导航成功率、更少的非诊断性活检结果和更高的诊断率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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 of Cone-beam-Derived Augmented Fluoroscopy and Ultrathin Bronchoscopy Versus Conventional Navigational Bronchoscopy Techniques.

Background: Pulmonary nodules suspicious for lung cancer are frequently diagnosed. Evaluating and optimizing the diagnostic yield of lung nodule biopsy is critical as innovation in bronchoscopy continues to progress.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Consecutive patients undergoing guided bronchoscopy for suspicious pulmonary nodule(s) between February 2020 and July 2021 were included. The cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)+ radial endobronchial ultrasound (r-EBUS) group had their procedure using CBCT-derived augmented fluoroscopy along with r-EBUS. The CBCT+ ultrathin bronchoscope (UTB)+r-EBUS group had the same procedure but with the use of an ultrathin bronchoscope. The r-EBUS group underwent r-EBUS guidance without CBCT or augmented fluoroscopy. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare diagnostic yield, adjusting for confounding variables.

Results: A total of 116 patients were included. The median pulmonary lesion diameter was 19.5 mm (interquartile range, 15.0 to 27.5 mm), and 91 (78.4%) were in the peripheral half of the lung. Thirty patients (25.9%) underwent CBCT+UTB, 27 (23.3%) CBCT, and 59 (50.9%) r-EBUS alone with unadjusted diagnostic yields of 86.7%, 70.4%, and 42.4%, respectively ( P <0.001). The adjusted diagnostic yields were 85.0% (95% CI, 68.6% to 100%), 68.3% (95% CI, 50.1% to 86.6%), and 44.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 58.0%), respectively. There was significantly more virtual navigational bronchoscopy use in the r-EBUS group (45.8%) compared with the CBCT+UTB (13.3%) and CBCT (18.5%) groups, respectively. CBCT procedures required dose area product radiation doses of 7602.5 µGym 2 .

Conclusion: Compared with the r-EBUS group, CBCT + UTB + r-EBUS was associated with higher navigational success, fewer nondiagnostic biopsy results, and a higher diagnostic yield. CBCT procedures are associated with a considerable radiation dose.

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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
121
期刊最新文献
AIBAN-AI Bronchial Detection and Airway Navigation System. High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy During Bronchoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Distinguishing Tracheobronchomalacia and Excessive Dynamic Airway Collapse on Dynamic CT Images. Evolution of Diagnostic Yield for Peripheral Lung Nodule Biopsies With Changes in Navigational Bronchoscopy Platforms, Tools, and Intraoperative Imaging Guidance. Sequential Bilateral Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction for Residual Hyperinflation Following Successful Index Procedure in Pulmonary Emphysema: A Multicenter 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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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