| Literature DB >> 35399563 |
Yeon Wook Kim1,2, Hyung-Jun Kim1,2, Myung Jin Song1,2, Byoung Soo Kwon1,2, Sung Yoon Lim1,2, Yeon Joo Lee1,2, Jong Sun Park1,2, Young-Jae Cho1,2, Ho Il Yoon1,2, Jae Ho Lee1,2, Choon-Taek Lee1,2.
Abstract
Background: Electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB) is an emerging technique for diagnosing pulmonary lesions. However, limited data is available on its sole utility under a least invasive setting without general anesthesia. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and safety of sole ENB under moderate sedation for diagnosing pulmonary lesions suspicious for lung cancer and to determine clinical factors associated with a better diagnostic yield.Entities:
Keywords: Electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB); diagnostic yield; lung cancer; minimally invasive; moderate sedation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35399563 PMCID: PMC8988087 DOI: 10.21037/tlcr-21-846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res ISSN: 2218-6751
Figure 1Flow diagram of the study population. ENB, electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy.
Demographic, clinical, procedural characteristics of study participants
| Characteristics | Total (n=94) |
|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD | 68.2±9.8 |
| Sex, n (%) | |
| Male | 63 (67.0) |
| Female | 31 (33.0) |
| Smoking status at procedure, n (%) | |
| Never-smoker | 41 (43.6) |
| Former smoker | 31 (33.0) |
| Current smoker | 22 (23.4) |
| Pack years smoked, mean ± SD | 19.8±24.3 |
| Lesion size, mm, mean ± SD | 34.3±14.9 |
| Location of lesion, n (%) | |
| Right upper lobe | 33 (35.1) |
| Right middle lobe | 5 (5.3) |
| Right lower lobe | 15 (16.0) |
| Left upper lobe | 18 (19.1) |
| Left lower lobe | 23 (24.5) |
| Lesion in peripheral two-thirds of the lung, n (%) | 73 (77.7) |
| Distance from lesion to pleura, mm, mean ± SD | 23.2±15.6 |
| Bronchus sign on CT, n (%) | |
| Class 0 | 17 (18.1) |
| Class 1 | 17 (18.1) |
| Class 2 | 60 (63.8) |
| Type of lesion, n (%) | |
| Solid | 87 (92.6) |
| Subsolid | 7 (7.4) |
| Tool used, n (%) | |
| Forceps biopsy | 66 (70.2) |
| Needle aspiration biopsy | 28 (29.8) |
| Sequential EBUS-TBNA for mediastinal staging, n (%) | 42 (44.7) |
| Total dose of sedatives, mean ± SD | |
| Midazolam, mg | 5.2±1.5 |
| Fentanyl, μg | 71.5±28.3 |
| Total procedure time, min, mean ± SD | 50.2±16.0 |
SD, standard deviation; CT, computed tomography; EBUS, endobronchial ultrasound; TBNA, transbronchial needle aspiration.
Figure 2Diagnostic results of participants who underwent electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy-guided biopsy. *, all malignancy cases confirmed by ENB-guided biopsy were determined as true positives; †, initially negative by ENB-guided biopsy and did not complete 6 months follow-up CT imaging for a non-progressive lesion. ENB, electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy; CT, computed tomography.
Diagnostic yield of electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy
| Excluding indeterminate cases (n=92) | Low estimate (n=94) | High estimate (n=94) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic yield [(TP + TN)/all biopsies performed] | 81.5% (75/92) | 79.8% (75/94) | 81.9% (77/94) |
| Sensitivity for malignancy | 77.6% (59/76) | 75.6% (59/78) | 77.6% (59/76) |
| Specificity for malignancy | 100% (16/16) | 100% (16/16) | 100% (18/18) |
| Positive predictive value | 100% (59/59) | 100% (59/59) | 100% (59/59) |
| Negative predictive value | 48.5% (16/33) | 45.7% (16/35) | 51.4% (18/35) |
TP, true positive; TN, true negative.
Univariable and multivariable regression analyses of factors associated with the diagnostic yield of electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy
| Variable | Univariate | Multivariate | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | ||
| Age | 1.03 (0.98–1.09) | 0.223 | 1.05 (0.99–1.12) | 0.120 | |
| Female sex ( | 0.81 (0.27–2.46) | 0.711 | 0.45 (0.04–5.24) | 0.526 | |
| Smoking history ( | 0.94 (0.32–2.74) | 0.911 | 0.35 (0.03–3.75) | 0.387 | |
| Lesion size in mm | 1.05 (1.00–1.10) | 0.037 | 1.03 (0.98–1.08) | 0.194 | |
| Solid type ( | 2.37 (0.40–14.12) | 0.345 | |||
| Lower lobe distribution ( | 1.69 (0.54–5.29) | 0.366 | |||
| Distance from visceral pleura in mm | 1.01 (0.97–1.05) | 0.616 | |||
| Bronchus sign ( | |||||
| Class 1 | 2.10 (0.47–9.30) | 0.328 | 2.09 (0.40–11.01) | 0.386 | |
| Class 2 | 6.18 (1.71–22.30) | 0.005 | 4.83 (1.16–20.12) | 0.031 | |
| Use of forceps as biopsy device ( | 0.70 (0.20–2.36) | 0.561 | |||
| Sequential EBUS-TBNA for mediastinal staging | 1.69 (0.57–5.05) | 0.345 | |||
| Total procedure time in minutes | 0.99 (0.96–1.02) | 0.552 | |||
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; EBUS, endobronchial ultrasound; TBNA, transbronchial needle aspiration.