EBV in patients with homogeneous emphysema without collateral ventilation results in clinically meaningful benefits of improved lung function, exercise tolerance, and quality of life.

Forceps, brushes or needles are currently the standard tools used during flexible bronchoscopy when diagnosing endobronchial malignancies. The new biopsy technique of cryobiopsy appears to provide better diagnostic samples. The aim of this study was to evaluate cryobiopsy over conventional endobronchial sampling.A total of 600 patients in eight centres with suspected endobronchial tumours were included in a prospective, randomised, single-blinded multicentre study. Patients were randomised to either sampling using forceps or the cryoprobe. After obtaining biopsy samples, a blinded histological evaluation was performed. According to the definitive clinical diagnosis, the diagnostic yield for malignancy was evaluated by a Chi-squared test.A total of 593 patients were randomised, of whom 563 had a final diagnosis of cancer. 281 patients were randomised to receive endobronchial biopsies using forceps and 282 had biopsies performed using a flexible cryoprobe. A definitive diagnosis was achieved in 85.1% of patients randomised to conventional forceps biopsy and 95.0% of patients who underwent cryobiopsy (p,0.001). Importantly, there was no difference in the incidence of significant bleeding.Endobronchial cryobiopsy is a safe technique with superior diagnostic yield in comparison with conventional forceps biopsy.

BackgroundThe lung volume reduction (LVR) coil is a minimally invasive bronchoscopic nitinol device designed to reduce hyperinflation and improve elastic recoil in severe emphysema. We investigated the feasibility, safety and efficacy of LVR coil treatment in a prospective multicentre cohort trial in patients with severe emphysema.MethodsPatients were treated in 11 centres. Safety was evaluated by recording all adverse events, efficacy by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) as primary endpoint, and pulmonary function testing, modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score (mMRC) and 6-min walk distance (6MWD) up to 12 months after the final treatment.ResultsSixty patients (60.9 ± 7.5 years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 30.2 ± 6.3% pred) were bronchoscopically treated with coils (55 bilateral, 5 unilateral), with a median of 10 (range 5–15) coils per lobe. Within 30 days post-treatment, seven chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations (6.1%), six pneumonias (5.2%), four pneumothoraces (3.5%) and one haemoptysis (0.9%) occurred as serious adverse events. At 6 and 12 months, respectively, ΔSGRQ was −12.1±12.9 and −11.1±13.3 points, Δ6MWD was +29.7±74.1 m and +51.4±76 m, ΔFEV1 was +0.11±0.20 L and +0.11±0.30 L, and ΔRV (residual volume) was −0.65±0.90 L and −0.71±0.81 L (all p<0.01). Post hoc analyses showed significant responses for SGRQ, 6MWD and RV in patients with both heterogeneous and homogeneous emphysema.ConclusionsLVR coil treatment results in significant clinical improvements in patients with severe emphysema, with a good safety profile and sustained results for up to 1 year.Trial registration number:NCT01328899.

The need for a less invasive procedure than surgical lung volume reduction that can produce consistent improvements with reduced morbidity remains a medical goal in patients with emphysema. We sought to determine the effect of bronchoscopic thermal vapour ablation (BTVA) on lung volumes and outcomes in patients with emphysema.44 patients with upper lobe-predominant emphysema were treated unilaterally with BTVA. Entry criteria included: age 40-75 yrs, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 15-45% predicted, previous pulmonary rehabilitation and a heterogeneity index (tissue/air ratio of lower lobe/upper lobe) from high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) o1.2. Changes in FEV1, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), 6-min walk distance (6MWD), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea score, and hyperinflation were measured at baseline, and 3 and 6 months post-BTVA.At 6 months, mean¡SE FEV1 improved by 141¡26 mL (p,0.001) and residual volume was reduced by 406¡113 mL (p,0.0001). SGRQ total score improved by 14.0¡2.4 points (p,0.001), with 73% improving by o4 points. Improvements were observed in 6MWD (46.5¡10.6 m) and mMRC dyspnoea score (0.9¡0.2) (p,0.001 for both). Lower respiratory events (n511) were the most common adverse event and occurred most often during the initial 30 days.BTVA therapy results in clinically relevant improvements in lung function, quality of life and exercise tolerance in upper lobe predominant emphysema.

Background: The potential of autofluorescence bronchoscopy (AFB) to detect precancerous lesions in the central airways and its role in lung cancer screening is uncertain. A study was undertaken to evaluate the prevalence of moderate/severe dysplasia (dysplasia II-III) and carcinoma in situ (CIS) using a newly developed AFB system in comparison with conventional white light bronchoscopy (WLB) alone. Methods: In a prospective randomised multicentre trial, smokers >40 years of age (>20 pack-years) were stratified into four different risk groups and investigated with either WLB+AFB (arm A) or WLB alone (arm B). Results: 1173 patients (916 men) of mean age 58.7 years were included. Overall (arms A and B), preinvasive lesions (dysplasia II-III and CIS) were detected in 3.9% of the patients. The prevalence of patients with preinvasive lesions in the WLB arm was 2.7% compared with 5.1% in the WLB+AFB arm (p = 0.037). For patients with dysplasia II-III, WLB+AFB increased the detection rate by a factor of 2.1 (p = 0.03), while for CIS the factor was only 1.24 (p = 0.75). The biopsy based sensitivity of WLB alone and WLB+AFB for detecting dysplasia II-III and CIS was 57.9% compared with 82.3% (1.42-fold increase). The corresponding specificity was 62.1% compared with 58.4% (0.94-fold decrease).Conclusions: This first randomised study of AFB showed that the combination of WLB+AFB was significantly superior to WLB alone in detecting preneoplastic lesions. Our findings do not support the general use of AFB as a screening tool for lung cancer, but suggest that it may be of use in certain groups. The precise indications await further study.