Back

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial mediastinal cryobiopsy: Insights and technical tips from our early experience with 30 patients

Soo, C. I.; Kho, S. S.

2023-08-09 respiratory medicine
10.1101/2023.08.06.23293719
Show abstract

BackgroundEndobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is commonly used to diagnose and stage lung cancer. In real-life practice, limitations are seen with cytology samples from EBUS-TBNA. Obtaining adequate samples can be challenging when faced with necrotic lesions with low cellular yield and the evolving landscape of targeted therapy, necessitating additional samples for comprehensive testing. Hence, transbronchial mediastinal cryobiopsy guided by endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS-TBMC) has emerged as a promising approach for obtaining larger tissue samples. In retrospective review, our aim is to present our early experience regarding the feasibility of performing EBUS-TBMC, employing a similar approach to EBUS-TBNA, followed by the outcomes of our procedures. We include a step-by-step explanation and some recommendations to conduct a successful EBUS-TBMC. MethodSingle center retrospective analysis to evaluate the feasibility and utility of EBUS-TBMC cases over six months from July to December 2022. Results36 EBUS-TBMC procedures on 30 patients. Moderate sedation was used in 80% of cases. Majority (83.4%) of the patients had biopsy of a single lesion with a median of 3 cryobiopsies (Interquartile range 3-4). The median cryo-activation time was 6 seconds (Interquartile range 6-8). EBUS-TBMC demonstrated a positive yield of 86.1% with an overall diagnostic yield of 83.3%. Mild bleeding occurred in six biopsies (16.7%) which did not required further intervention. No other major complications were observed. ConclusionEBUS-TBMC is a safe and effective alternative to EBUS-TBNA. Histology samples obtained through EBUS-TBMC have the potential to increase confidence in diagnosing and staging lung cancer, thereby alleviating concerns about tissue inadequacy.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 54%
8.3%
2
ERJ Open Research
based on 36 papers
Top 0.5%
7.6%
3
Medicine
based on 29 papers
Top 0.8%
5.9%
4
Respiratory Research
based on 10 papers
Top 0.3%
5.9%
5
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
based on 32 papers
Top 0.7%
5.4%
6
European Respiratory Journal
based on 44 papers
Top 1%
5.4%
7
Annals of Translational Medicine
based on 14 papers
Top 0.4%
4.7%
8
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
based on 10 papers
Top 0.1%
4.5%
9
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 42%
4.5%
50% of probability mass above
10
Journal of Clinical Virology
based on 54 papers
Top 0.6%
4.5%
11
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
based on 23 papers
Top 0.5%
4.5%
12
Journal of Medical Virology
based on 95 papers
Top 4%
2.3%
13
Thorax
based on 29 papers
Top 1%
1.9%
14
Frontiers in Medicine
based on 99 papers
Top 9%
1.9%
15
The American Journal of Pathology
based on 11 papers
Top 0.7%
1.6%
16
Frontiers in Oncology
based on 34 papers
Top 4%
1.6%
17
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
based on 77 papers
Top 4%
1.3%
18
Clinical and Translational Medicine
based on 11 papers
Top 0.8%
1.3%
19
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy
based on 10 papers
Top 0.5%
1.3%
20
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
based on 15 papers
Top 1%
1.3%
21
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 47%
1.2%
22
Frontiers in Public Health
based on 135 papers
Top 22%
1.2%
23
Frontiers in Pharmacology
based on 27 papers
Top 4%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
based on 115 papers
Top 20%
0.7%
25
F1000Research
based on 28 papers
Top 6%
0.7%
26
Journal of Clinical Medicine
based on 77 papers
Top 18%
0.7%
27
JMIR Formative Research
based on 31 papers
Top 7%
0.7%
28
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
based on 14 papers
Top 3%
0.7%