| Literature DB >> 33921579 |
Mărioara Simon1, Ioan Simon2, Paul Andrei Tent3, Doina Adina Todea1,4, Antonia Haranguș1,5.
Abstract
Optimizing the diagnosis of lung cancer represents a challenge, as well as a necessity, for improving the low survival of these patients. Flexible bronchoscopy with forceps biopsy is one of the key diagnostic procedures used for lung tumors. The small sample size and crush artifacts are several factors that can often limit access to a complete diagnosis, therefore leading to the need of repeating the bronchoscopy procedure or other invasive diagnostic methods. The bronchoscopic cryobiopsy is a recent technique that proved its utility in the diagnosis of both endobronchial and peripheral lung tumors. In comparison with conventional forceps biopsy, studies report a higher diagnostic yield and a superior quality of the collected samples for both the histopathological and the molecular diagnosis of lung cancer. This method shows promising results in sampling lung tissue, alone, or in conjunction with fluoroscopy or radial endobronchial ultrasound (r-EBUS). With a good safety and cost-benefit profile, this novel method has the potential to improve the diagnosis, and therefore the management of lung cancer patients. The objective of this narrative review is to provide a comprehensive review of the recent data regarding the advantages of cryobiopsy and r-EBUS in lung cancer diagnosis.Entities:
Keywords: biopsy; bronchoscopy; cryosurgery; lung neoplasms
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33921579 PMCID: PMC8074219 DOI: 10.3390/medicina57040393
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) ISSN: 1010-660X Impact factor: 2.430
Figure 1Flowchart of the search process for the review regarding cryobiopsy in lung cancer.
Figure 2Transbronchial cryobiopsy of a peripheral lung tumor. The cryoprobe (grey) is introduced through the fiberoptic bronchoscope 6.2 mm working channel. The probe is cooled for 5–6 s (image A). A Fogarty balloon (black) is placed in the proximal lobar bronchus from the lesion and is inflated after the biopsy. The cryobiopsy sample has a larger size of >10 mm (images B,C).
Characteristics of the studies describing the value of TBLC and r-EBUS for PPLs.
| Author | Study Design | Number of Patients | Median Size of Biopsy Sample TBB vs. TBLC | Use of EBUS or Fluoroscopy | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasu et al. [ | Retrospective | 53 | 2.62/14.1 mm2 | r-EBUS + GS | Cryobiopsy with GS in PPLs with positive bronchus sign significantly increases diagnostic yield (OR = 11.6, |
| Imabayashi et al. [ | Retrospective | 38 | NA/12.2 mm2 | r-EBUS | Diagnostic yield of CB increased from 86.1% to 91.6% when adding stamp cytology. |
| Schuhmann et al. [ | Randomized controlled study | 38 | 4.69/11.17 mm2 | r-EBUS +GS | Time of TBLC was significantly longer when compared to TBB. Diagnostic yield was of 61.3% (19/31) for TBB and 74.2% (23/31) for TBLC ( |
| Arimura et al. [ | Prospective | 23 | 0.003 ± 0.0003/0.078 ± 0.008 (mean ± SEM) cm3 | r-EBUS + GS + Fluoroscopy | Higher diagnostic accuracy for TBLB in comparison to TBB (87% versus 82.6%). |
| Taton et. al. [ | Prospective | 32 | 1.1 ± 0.6/5.3 ± 0.7 mm | r-EBUS + GS | No statistically significant impact on the diagnostic yield for the location or size of nodule or the technique use (visualization with EBUS mini probe) |
| Hibare et al. [ | Retrospective | 55 | NA | Radial EBUS ± GS ± Fluoroscopy | No significant difference was found in diagnostic yield between TBB or TBLC. 14% of lesions could not be located by r-EBUS |
| Kho et al. [ | Retrospectve | 114 | NA | Radial EBUS ± GS ± Fluoroscopy | The addition of rapid on-site cytology (ROSE) increased the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and diagnostic accuracy |
| Herath et al. [ | Prospective | 6 | 3.4/6.4 mm | Radial EBUS + GS | The GS was trimmed by 3 cm from the distal end of the scope for a better contact. |
| Udagawa et al. [ | Prospective | 121 | 2/15 mm2 | Radial EBUS ± GS + Fluoroscopy | Larger amounts of DNA and RNA with TBLC (a median of 1.60 µg DNA and 0.62 µg RNA with cryoprobe vs. 0.58 µg DNA and 0.17 µg RNA with forceps). |