HOMEPRODUCTSCOMPANYCONTACTFAQResearchDictionaryPharmaSign Up FREE or Login

Accurate and safe mediastinal restaging by combined endobronchial and endoscopic ultrasound-guided needle aspiration performed by single ultrasound bronchoscope.

AbstractOBJECTIVES:
The aim of this prospective trial was to assess the diagnostic utility of combined endobronchial (EBUS) and endoscopic (EUS) ultrasound-guided needle aspiration by use of a single ultrasound bronchoscope (CUSb-NA) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) restaging in patients after induction therapy.
METHODS:
In a consecutive group of NSCLC patients with pathologically confirmed N2 disease (clinical stage IIIa and IIIb) who underwent induction chemotherapy, CUSb-NA was performed. All of the patients with negative or suspected for metastases (uncertain) diagnosed by endoscopy underwent subsequently transcervical extended mediastinal lymphadenectomy (TEMLA) as a confirmatory test.
RESULTS:
From January 2009 to December 2012, 106 patients met the inclusion criteria and underwent restaging CUSb-NA under mild sedation, in whom 286 (mean 2.7, range 2-5) lymph node stations were biopsied, 127 (mean 1.2, range 1-3) by EBUS-transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) and 159 (mean 1.5, range 1-4) by EUS-fine needle aspiration (FNA). The CUSb-NA revealed metastatic lymph node involvement in 37/106 patients (34.9%). In 69 (65.1%) patients with negative and uncertain CUSb-NA in 4 (3.8%) out of them, who underwent subsequent TEMLA metastatic nodes were found in 18 patients (17.0%) and there were single lymph nodes found only in one mediastinal station (minimal N2) in 10 (9.4%) out of them. False-positive results were found in 2 (1.9%) patients. In 9 (8.5%) patients CUSb-NA occurred to be false negative in Stations 2R and 4R (only accessible for EBUS), exclusively in small nodes and in 4 (3.8%) patients in Station 5-not accessible for CUSb-NA. The prevalence of mediastinal lymph node metastases in the present study was 51.9%. Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, total accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) of the restaging CUSb-NA were 67.3% (95% CI [confidence interval]-53-79), 96.0% (95% CI-86-99), 81.0% (95% CI-73-87), 95.0% (95% CI-83-99) and 73.0% (95% CI-61-83), respectively. The sensitivity, accuracy and NPV of CUSb-NA were higher compared with EBUS-TBNA and EUS-FNA alone. No complications of CUSb-NA were observed.
CONCLUSIONS:
The CUSb-NA is a reasonable and safe technique in mediastinal restaging in NSCLC patients after induction therapy. Following our data, in patients with negative result of CUSb-NA, a surgical restaging of the mediastinum should be considered.
AuthorsArtur Szlubowski, Marcin Zieliński, Jerzy Soja, Anna Filarecka, Stanisław Orzechowski, Juliusz Pankowski, Anna Obrochta, Magdalena Jakubiak, Joanna Węgrzyn, Adam Cmiel
JournalEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery (Eur J Cardiothorac Surg) Vol. 46 Issue 2 Pg. 262-6 (Aug 2014) ISSN: 1873-734X [Electronic] Germany
PMID24420366 (Publication Type: Journal Article)
Copyright© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.
Topics
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Biopsy, Needle (instrumentation, methods)
  • Bronchoscopy (instrumentation, methods)
  • Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung (diagnostic imaging, epidemiology, pathology, surgery)
  • Endosonography (instrumentation, methods)
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Lung Neoplasms (diagnostic imaging, epidemiology, pathology, surgery)
  • Male
  • Mediastinum (pathology, surgery)
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasm Staging (methods)
  • Predictive Value of Tests

Join CureHunter, for free Research Interface BASIC access!

Take advantage of free CureHunter research engine access to explore the best drug and treatment options for any disease. Find out why thousands of doctors, pharma researchers and patient activists around the world use CureHunter every day.
Realize the full power of the drug-disease research graph!


Choose Username:
Email:
Password:
Verify Password:
Enter Code Shown: