No abstract

One limitation of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is the size of the available needles, frequently yielding only cells for cytological examination. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of newly developed needle forceps to obtain tissue for the histological diagnosis of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes.Patients with enlarged, positron emission tomography (PET)-positive lymph nodes were included. The transbronchial needle forceps (TBNF), a sampling instrument combining the characteristics of a needle (bevelled tip for penetrating through the bronchial wall) with forceps (two serrated jaws for grasping tissue) was used through the working channel of the EBUS-TBNA scope. Efficacy and safety was assessed.50 patients (36 males and 14 females; mean age 51 yrs) with enlarged or PET-positive lymph nodes were included in this pilot study. In 48 (96%) patients penetration of the bronchial wall was possible and in 45 patients tissue for histological diagnosis was obtained. In three patients TBNF provided inadequate material. For patients in whom the material was adequate for a histological examination, a specific diagnosis was established in 43 (86%) out of 50 patients (nonsmall cell lung cancer: n524; small cell lung cancer: n57; sarcoidosis: n54; Hodgkin's lymphoma: n54; tuberculosis: n52; and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: n52).No clinically significant procedure-related complications were encountered.This study demonstrated that EBUS-TBNF is a safe procedure and provides diagnostic histological specimens of mediastinal lymph nodes.

Background: Online adaptive radiotherapy is intended to prevent plan degradation caused by inter-fractional tumor volume and shape changes, but time limitations make online re-planning challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of online-adapted plans to their respective reference treatment plans. Methods: Fifty-two patients treated on a ViewRay MRIdian Linac were included in this retrospective study. In total 238 online-adapted plans were analyzed, which were optimized with either changing of the segment weights (n = 85) or full re-optimization (n = 153). Five different treatment sites were evaluated: prostate, abdomen, liver, lung and pelvis. Dosimetric parameters of gross tumor volume (GTV), planning target volume (PTV), 2 cm ring around the PTV and organs at risk (OARs) were considered. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences between online-adapted and reference treatment plans, p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The average duration of the online adaptation, consisting of contour editing, plan optimization and quality assurance (QA), was 24 ± 6 min. The GTV was slightly larger (average ± SD: 1.9% ± 9.0%) in the adapted plans than in the reference plans (p < 0.001). GTV-D 95% exhibited no significant changes when considering all plans, but GTV-D 2% increased by 0.40% ± 1.5% on average (p < 0.001). There was a very small yet significant decrease in GTVcoverage for the abdomen plans. The ring D mean increased on average by 1.0% ± 3.6% considering all plans (p < 0.001). There was a significant reduction of the dose to the rectum of 4.7% ± 16% on average (p < 0.001) for prostate plans. Conclusions: Dosimetric quality of online-adapted plans was comparable to reference treatment plans and OAR dose was either comparable or decreased, depending on treatment site. However, dose spillage was slightly increased.