Work

Diagnostic Yield and Complications of Bronchoscopy for Peripheral Lung Lesions. Results of the AQuIRE Registry

Year: 2015

Type: article

Abstract: RATIONALE: Advanced bronchoscopy techniques such as electromagnetic navigation (EMN) have been studied in clinical trials, but there are no randomized studies comparing EMN with standard bronchoscopy. OBJECTIVES: To measure and identify the determinants of diagnostic yield for bronchoscopy in patients with peripheral lung lesions. Secondary outcomes included diagnostic yield of different sampling techniques, complications, and practice pattern variations. METHODS: We used the AQuIRE (ACCP Quality Improvement Registry, Evaluation, and Education) registry to conduct a multicenter study of consecutive patients who underwent transbronchial biopsy (TBBx) for evaluation of peripheral lesions. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen centers with 22 physicians enrolled 581 patients. Of the 581 patients, 312 (53.7%) had a diagnostic bronchoscopy. Unadjusted for other factors, the diagnostic yield was 63.7% when no radial endobronchial ultrasound (r-EBUS) and no EMN were used, 57.0% with r-EBUS alone, 38.5% with EMN alone, and 47.1% with EMN combined with r-EBUS. In multivariate analysis, peripheral transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA), larger lesion size, nonupper lobe location, and tobacco use were associated with increased diagnostic yield, whereas EMN was associated with lower diagnostic yield. Peripheral TBNA was used in 16.4% of cases. TBNA was diagnostic, whereas TBBx was nondiagnostic in 9.5% of cases in which both were performed. Complications occurred in 13 (2.2%) patients, and pneumothorax occurred in 10 (1.7%) patients. There were significant differences between centers and physicians in terms of case selection, sampling methods, and anesthesia. Medical center diagnostic yields ranged from 33 to 73% (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral TBNA improved diagnostic yield for peripheral lesions but was underused. The diagnostic yields of EMN and r-EBUS were lower than expected, even after adjustment.

Source: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201507-1332oc