BACKGROUND: Although the diagnostic validity and predictive factors for the diagnostic yield of transbronchial biopsy (TBB) of clearly defined pulmonary lesions with no visible endobronchial lesion have been analyzed in numerous studies, very few have used multivariate analysis techniques to evaluate the validity of TBB as a diagnostic tool or to analyze the independent influence of clearly dependent variables, such as the bronchus sign and lesion size. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all cases in which this type of lesion underwent TBB under fluoroscopic control between 2006 and 2008. The analyzed variables included lesion size, localization, the presence of the bronchus sign, and the final result obtained. We performed a descriptive analysis of the TBB results and a multivariate analysis of the predictive factors for the results using logistic regression techniques. RESULTS: A total of 273 patients (206 males, 75.5%) were included in the study. The average lesion diameter was 34 (± 16) mm, with 24% 2 cm or smaller. Twenty-eight percent of the lesions were localized in the lower lobes and 32% in the peripheral third of the lung. The bronchus sign was present in 28% of the patients. Seventy-eight percent of the patients had primary or metastatic malignant lung lesions, the rest were benign lesions of diverse etiology. TBB was diagnostic in 45.4% of cases. In the multivariate analysis, the only independent predictors of outcome were malignant etiology (OR = 4.8; 95% CI = 2.210.4), diameter >20 mm (OR = 3.6; 95% CI = 1.8-7.3), and the presence of the bronchus sign (OR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.3-4.3). CONCLUSIONS: TBB of lesions clearly delimited without an endobronchial lesion can lead to diagnosis in almost half of the patients. The nature of the lesion, diameter >20 mm, and the presence of the bronchus sign are independent predictors of outcome.
BACKGROUND: Although the diagnostic validity and predictive factors for the diagnostic yield of transbronchial biopsy (TBB) of clearly defined pulmonary lesions with no visible endobronchial lesion have been analyzed in numerous studies, very few have used multivariate analysis techniques to evaluate the validity of TBB as a diagnostic tool or to analyze the independent influence of clearly dependent variables, such as the bronchus sign and lesion size. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all cases in which this type of lesion underwent TBB under fluoroscopic control between 2006 and 2008. The analyzed variables included lesion size, localization, the presence of the bronchus sign, and the final result obtained. We performed a descriptive analysis of the TBB results and a multivariate analysis of the predictive factors for the results using logistic regression techniques. RESULTS: A total of 273 patients (206 males, 75.5%) were included in the study. The average lesion diameter was 34 (± 16) mm, with 24% 2 cm or smaller. Twenty-eight percent of the lesions were localized in the lower lobes and 32% in the peripheral third of the lung. The bronchus sign was present in 28% of the patients. Seventy-eight percent of the patients had primary or metastatic malignant lung lesions, the rest were benign lesions of diverse etiology. TBB was diagnostic in 45.4% of cases. In the multivariate analysis, the only independent predictors of outcome were malignant etiology (OR = 4.8; 95% CI = 2.210.4), diameter >20 mm (OR = 3.6; 95% CI = 1.8-7.3), and the presence of the bronchus sign (OR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.3-4.3). CONCLUSIONS:TBB of lesions clearly delimited without an endobronchial lesion can lead to diagnosis in almost half of the patients. The nature of the lesion, diameter >20 mm, and the presence of the bronchus sign are independent predictors of outcome.
Authors: Ralf Eberhardt; Devanand Anantham; Armin Ernst; David Feller-Kopman; Felix Herth Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2007-03-22 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Gregorino Paone; Emanuele Nicastri; Gabriele Lucantoni; Raffaele Dello Iacono; Paolo Battistoni; Anna Lisa D'Angeli; Giovanni Galluccio Journal: Chest Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: S Bilaçeroğlu; Z Kumcuoğlu; H Alper; E Osma; U Cağirici; O Günel; U Bayol; E Celikten; K Perim; T Köse Journal: Respiration Date: 1998 Impact factor: 3.580
Authors: C García Quero; R García Luján; F González Torralba; E de Miguel Poch; J Alfaro Abreu; V Villena Garrido; F López Ríos; A López Encuentra Journal: Rev Clin Esp Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 1.556
Authors: Asha Bonney; Michael Christie; Anne Beaty; Sebastian Lunke; Graham Taylor; Louis Irving; Daniel Steinfort Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 2.895