Jessica S Wang Memoli1, Paul J Nietert2, Gerard A Silvestri3. 1. Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Respiratory Services, Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC. Electronic address: Jessica.S.WangMemoli@Medstar.net. 2. Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC. 3. Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy and Sleep Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The detection of pulmonary nodules (PNs) is likely to increase, especially with the release of the National Lung Screen Trials. When tissue diagnosis is desired, transthoracic needle aspiration (TTNA) is recommended. Several guided-bronchoscopy technologies have been developed to improve the yield of transbronchial biopsy for PN diagnosis: electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB), virtual bronchoscopy (VB), radial endobronchial ultrasound (R-EBUS), ultrathin bronchoscope, and guide sheath. We undertook this meta-analysis to determine the overall diagnostic yield of guided bronchoscopy using one or a combination of the modalities described here. METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE search using “bronchoscopy” and “solitary pulmonary nodule.” Studies evaluating the diagnostic yield of ENB, VB, R-EBUS, ultrathin bronchoscope, and/or guide sheath for peripheral nodules were included. The overall diagnostic yield and yield based on size were extracted. Adverse events, if reported, were recorded. Meta-analysis techniques incorporating inverse variance weighting and a random-effects meta-analysis approach were used. RESULTS: A total of 3,052 lesions from 39 studies were included. The pooled diagnostic yield was 70%, which is higher than the yield for traditional transbronchial biopsy. The yield increased as the lesion size increased. The pneumothorax rate was 1.5%, which is significantly smaller than that reported for TTNA. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that the diagnostic yield of guided bronchoscopic techniques is better than that of traditional transbronchial biopsy. Although the yield remains lower than that of TTNA, the procedural risk is lower. Guided bronchoscopy may be an alternative or be complementary to TTNA for tissue sampling of PN, but further study is needed to determine its role in the evaluation of peripheral pulmonary lesions.
BACKGROUND: The detection of pulmonary nodules (PNs) is likely to increase, especially with the release of the National Lung Screen Trials. When tissue diagnosis is desired, transthoracic needle aspiration (TTNA) is recommended. Several guided-bronchoscopy technologies have been developed to improve the yield of transbronchial biopsy for PN diagnosis: electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB), virtual bronchoscopy (VB), radial endobronchial ultrasound (R-EBUS), ultrathin bronchoscope, and guide sheath. We undertook this meta-analysis to determine the overall diagnostic yield of guided bronchoscopy using one or a combination of the modalities described here. METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE search using “bronchoscopy” and “solitary pulmonary nodule.” Studies evaluating the diagnostic yield of ENB, VB, R-EBUS, ultrathin bronchoscope, and/or guide sheath for peripheral nodules were included. The overall diagnostic yield and yield based on size were extracted. Adverse events, if reported, were recorded. Meta-analysis techniques incorporating inverse variance weighting and a random-effects meta-analysis approach were used. RESULTS: A total of 3,052 lesions from 39 studies were included. The pooled diagnostic yield was 70%, which is higher than the yield for traditional transbronchial biopsy. The yield increased as the lesion size increased. The pneumothorax rate was 1.5%, which is significantly smaller than that reported for TTNA. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that the diagnostic yield of guided bronchoscopic techniques is better than that of traditional transbronchial biopsy. Although the yield remains lower than that of TTNA, the procedural risk is lower. Guided bronchoscopy may be an alternative or be complementary to TTNA for tissue sampling of PN, but further study is needed to determine its role in the evaluation of peripheral pulmonary lesions.
Authors: Thomas R Gildea; Peter J Mazzone; Demet Karnak; Moulay Meziane; Atul C Mehta Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2006-07-27 Impact factor: 21.405
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: D Makris; A Scherpereel; S Leroy; B Bouchindhomme; J-B Faivre; J Remy; P Ramon; C-H Marquette Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2007-03-14 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Christophe A Dooms; Eric K Verbeken; Heinrich D Becker; Maurits G Demedts; Johan F Vansteenkiste Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Hamid Pahlevaninezhad; Anthony M D Lee; Alexander Ritchie; Tawimas Shaipanich; Wei Zhang; Diana N Ionescu; Geoffrey Hohert; Calum MacAulay; Stephen Lam; Pierre Lane Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Philip J Swaney; Arthur W Mahoney; Andria A Remirez; Erik Lamers; Bryan I Hartley; Richard H Feins; Ron Alterovitz; Robert J Webster Journal: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom Date: 2015-05
Authors: Lonny B Yarmus; Sixto Arias; David Feller-Kopman; Roy Semaan; Ko Pen Wang; Bernice Frimpong; Karen Oakjones Burgess; Richard Thompson; Alex Chen; Ricardo Ortiz; Hans J Lee Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Nichole T Tanner; Lonny Yarmus; Alexander Chen; Jessica Wang Memoli; Hiren J Mehta; Nicholas J Pastis; Hans Lee; Michael A Jantz; Paul J Nietert; Gerard A Silvestri Journal: Chest Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 9.410