| Literature DB >> 34527315 |
Toru Sawada1, Hiromitsu Takizawa1, Mariko Aoyama1, Naoya Kawakita1, Naoki Miyamoto1, Shinichi Sakamoto1, Mika Takashima1, Daisuke Matsumoto1, Hiroaki Toba1, Yukikiyo Kawakami1, Mitsuteru Yoshida1, Kazuya Kondo2, Akira Tangoku1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visceral pleural invasion (VPI) in lung cancer is a significant prognostic factor; however, it is difficult to diagnose preoperatively or intraoperatively. In this study, we examined the possibility of intraoperative diagnosis of VPI using confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE).Entities:
Keywords: Lung cancer; confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE); visceral pleural invasion (VPI)
Year: 2021 PMID: 34527315 PMCID: PMC8411182 DOI: 10.21037/jtd-21-137
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Thorac Dis ISSN: 2072-1439 Impact factor: 2.895
Figure 1Cases without visceral pleural invasion (pl0). (A) Chest CT shows a tumor in contact with the interlobar pleura; (B) macroscopic findings of the resected lung show depression and whitening in the visceral pleura at the tumor site; (C) CLE findings of the visceral pleura without tumor show a network structure; (D) CLE findings of the visceral pleura at the tumor site show an autofluorescence-positive structure; (E) Elastica van Gieson stain shows no tumor invasion in the visceral pleura, and the distance between the pleural surface and the external elastic membrane was short (×25).
Figure 2Case of visceral pleural invasion (pl1). (A) Chest CT shows a tumor in contact with the parietal pleura; (B) Macroscopic findings of the resected lung show depression and whitening in the visceral pleura at the tumor site; (C) CLE findings of the visceral pleura without tumor show a network structure; (D) CLE findings of the visceral pleura at the tumor site show a lack of autofluorescence-positive structure; (E) Elastica van Gieson stain shows visceral pleural invasion, and a thick layer of collagenous fibers were formed between the pleural surface and the external elastic membrane (×25).
Patient characteristics
| Factor | ||
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| Sex | 71.5 (50 to 85) | 70.6 (49 to 84) |
| Male | 21 | 10 |
| Female | 14 | 5 |
| Histological type | ||
| Ad | 25 | 12 |
| Sq | 9 | 3 |
| Small | 1 | |
| Total size (cm) | 2.1 (0.9–3.8) | 2.3 (0.4–4.6) |
| Solid size (cm) | 1.4 (0–3.7) | 1.9 (0–4.6) |
| SUV max | 5.3 (0.5–28.3) | 5.1 (0.7–11.1) |
| Pathological VPI | ||
| pl0 | 29 | 12 |
| pl1 | 6 | 3 |
Ad, adenocarcinoma; Sq, squamous cell carcinoma; Small, small cell carcinoma; SUV max, maximum standardized uptake value; VPI, visceral pleural invasion.
Figure 3The CLE probe progressed into the thoracic cavity and the tip of the probe was guided to the site of pleural change.
Figure 4CLE findings and Elastica van Gieson stain in the horizontal section of the visceral pleura. (A) CLE findings of the visceral the pleura in normal lung shows a network structure; (B) CLE findings of the visceral pleura at the tumor site in non-VPI cases show thick and wavy structures; (C) autofluorescence-positive structures were not noted. CLE findings of the visceral pleura at the tumor site in cases with VPI; (D) Elastica van Gieson stain in the horizontal section of the visceral pleura in (A) shows elastic fibers with a network structure (×600); (E) Elastica van Gieson stain in the horizontal section of the visceral pleura in (B) shows thick and wavy elastic fibers (×600); (F) Elastica van Gieson stain in the horizontal section of the visceral pleura in (C) shows an increase in collagenous fibers with tumor cells (×600).
Performance of CLE imaging for the diagnosis of pathologic visceral pleural invasion in lung cancer
| Defect ratio values | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reader 1 | |||||
| Defect ratio ≥25% | 100.0 | 46.2 | 30.0 | 100.0 | 56.3 |
| Defect ratio ≥50% | 83.3 | 73.1 | 41.7 | 95.0 | 75.0 |
| Defect ratio ≥75% | 66.7 | 88.5 | 57.1 | 92.0 | 84.4 |
| Defect ratio =100% | 33.3 | 92.3 | 50.0 | 85.7 | 81.3 |
| Reader 2 | |||||
| Defect ratio ≥25% | 100.0 | 38.5 | 27.3 | 100.0 | 56.3 |
| Defect ratio ≥50% | 100.0 | 57.7 | 35.3 | 100.0 | 75.0 |
| Defect ratio ≥75% | 66.7 | 84.6 | 50.0 | 91.7 | 84.4 |
| Defect ratio =100% | 16.7 | 92.3 | 33.3 | 82.8 | 81.3 |
| Reader 3 | |||||
| Defect ratio ≥25% | 100.0 | 38.5 | 27.3 | 100.0 | 50.0 |
| Defect ratio ≥50% | 100.0 | 73.1 | 46.2 | 100.0 | 78.1 |
| Defect ratio ≥75% | 66.7 | 92.3 | 66.7 | 91.7 | 87.5 |
| Defect ratio =100% | 16.7 | 92.3 | 33.3 | 82.8 | 78.1 |
CLE, confocal laser endomicroscopy; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.
Figure 5Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of pathological visceral pleural invasion using defect ratio of autofluorescence-positive structure assigned by three readers.
Interobserver agreement for the defect ratio of autofluorescence-positive structures
| Defect ratio values | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Readers A and B | Readers A and C | Readers B and C | |
| Overall defect ratios | 0.68 (0.58–0.77) | 0.75 (0.67–0.84) | 0.71 (0.63–0.81) |
| Defect ratio ≥50% | 0.69 (0.57–0.81) | 0.80 (0.70–0.91) | 0.75 (0.64–0.86) |
| Defect ratio ≥75% | 0.91 (0.83–0.98) | 0.71 (0.66–0.86) | 0.63 (0.57–0.79) |
Performance of CLE, CT, and white light for the diagnosis of pathologic visceral pleural invasion in lung cancer
| Performance Index | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLE defect ratio ≥50% | |||||
| Reader 1 | 83.3 | 73.1 | 41.7 | 95.0 | 75.0 |
| Reader 2 | 100.0 | 57.7 | 35.3 | 100.0 | 75.0 |
| Reader 3 | 100.0 | 73.1 | 46.2 | 100.0 | 78.1 |
| Average | 94.4 | 68.0 | 41.1 | 98.3 | 76.0 |
| CT | |||||
| Reader 1 | 83.3 | 75.9 | 41.7 | 95.7 | 77.1 |
| Reader 2 | 83.3 | 65.5 | 33.3 | 95.0 | 68.6 |
| Reader 3 | 83.3 | 62.1 | 31.3 | 94.7 | 65.7 |
| Average | 83.3 | 67.8 | 34.9 | 95.2 | 70.5 |
| White light | |||||
| Reader 1 | 83.3 | 69.0 | 35.7 | 95.2 | 71.4 |
| Reader 2 | 66.7 | 69.0 | 30.8 | 90.9 | 68.6 |
| Reader 3 | 83.3 | 72.4 | 38.5 | 95.5 | 74.3 |
| Average | 77.8 | 70.1 | 35.0 | 93.8 | 71.4 |
CLE, confocal laser endomicroscopy; CT, computed tomography; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.