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.
A B S T R A C T PurposeTo examine the association between beta-blocker (BB) intake, pathologic complete response (pCR) rates, and survival outcomes in patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 1,413 patients with breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 1995 and 2007. Patients taking BBs at the start of neoadjuvant therapy were compared with patients with no BB intake. Rates of pCR between the groups were compared using a 2 test. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to determine the association between BB intake, relapse-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS). ResultsPatients who used BBs (n ϭ 102) were compared with patients (n ϭ 1,311) who did not. Patients receiving BBs tended to be older and obese (P Ͻ .001). The proportion of pCR was not significantly different between the groups (P ϭ .48). After adjustment for age, race, stage, grade, receptor status, lymphovascular invasion, body mass index, diabetes, hypertension, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use, BB intake was associated with a significantly better RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88) but not OS (P ϭ .09). Among patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC; n ϭ 377), BB intake was associated with improved RFS (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.87; P ϭ .027) but not OS (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.12 to 1.00; P ϭ .05). ConclusionIn this study, BB intake was associated with improved RFS in all patients with breast cancer and in patients with TNBC. Additional studies evaluating the potential benefits of beta-adrenergic blockade on breast cancer recurrence with a focus on TNBC are warranted.
Mediastinal lymph node sampling is a critical step in the staging of lung cancer [1][2][3] and in the diagnosis of infl ammatory conditions, such as sarcoidosis. [4][5][6][7][8] Over the past decade, endobronchial ultrasoundguided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) has emerged as a minimally invasive, highly accurate technique for sampling intrathoracic lymph nodes, with a sensitivity of 88% to 93% in distinguishing lymph node metastases from benign conditions. 9,10 Comparative studies have demonstrated the superiority of EBUS-TBNA to conventional TBNA. 11 EBUS-TBNA can reach multiple nodal stations, including Background: Few studies of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) have been large enough to identify risk factors for complications. The primary objective of this study was to quantify the incidence of and risk factors for complications in patients undergoing EBUS-TBNA. Methods: Data on prospectively enrolled patients undergoing EBUS-TBNA in the American College of Chest Physicians Quality Improvement Registry, Evaluation, and Education (AQuIRE) database were extracted and analyzed for the incidence, consequences, and predictors of complications. Results: We enrolled 1,317 patients at six hospitals. Complications occurred in 19 patients (1.44%; 95% CI, 0.87%-2.24%). Transbronchial lung biopsy (TBBx) was the only risk factor for complications, which occurred in 3.21% of patients who underwent the procedure and in 1.15% of those who did not (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.07-7.59; P 5 .04). Pneumothorax occurred in seven patients (0.53%; 95% CI, 0.21%-1.09%). Escalations in level of care occurred in 14 patients (1.06%; 95% CI, 0.58%-1.78%); its risk factors were age . 70 years (OR, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.36-12.12; P 5 .012), inpatient status (OR, 4.93; 95% CI, 1.30-18.74; P 5 .019), and undergoing deep sedation or general anesthesia (OR, 4.68; 95% CI, 1.02-21.61; P 5 .048). TBBx was performed in only 12.6% of patients when rapid onsite cytologic evaluation (ROSE ) was used and in 19.1% when it was not used ( P 5 .006). Interhospital variation in TBBx use when ROSE was used was signifi cant ( P , .001). Conclusions: TBBx was the only risk factor for complications during EBUS-TBNA procedures. ROSE signifi cantly reduced the use of TBBx.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.