Diagnostic value of endobronchial ultrasonography with guide-sheath combined with virtual bronchoscopy navigation in peripheral lung cancer

Abstract

Objective: To explore the diagnostic value and safety of endobronchial ultrasonography with guide-sheath (EBUS-GS) combined with virtual bronchoscopy navigation (VBN) in peripheral lung cancer. Methods: Between Dec. 2015 to Dec. 2016, patients with pulmonary solitary nodule suspected of early lung cancer on computed tomography (CT) in Department of Respiratory, Tangdu Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University were enrolled for this study. The patients underwent EBUS-GS transbronchoscopic lung biopsy (TBLB) with or without VBN. The visibility rate, diagnostic yield, influencing factors, the operation time and complications were evaluated in the 2 groups. The data were compared using independent sample t test or chi-squared test. Results: A total of 134 patients were enrolled and completed this study. Among them 74 were males and 60 were females. There were 64 cases in the group of EBUS-GS with VBN (VBNA), and 70 in the group without VBN (NVBNA). The visibility rate and diagnosis rate of VBNA group were 87.5% (56/64) and 78.1% (50/64), respectively. The mean time of operation and confirming the target lesions were (25±5), (5.8±1.3) min, respectively. The visibility rate and diagnosis rate of NVBNA group were 81.4%(57/70) and 75.7%(53/70), respectively. The mean time of operation and confirming the target lesions were (27±6), (9.8±1.5)min .There was no significant difference in the visibility rate and diagnosis rate between the 2 groups (χ(2)=0.933, P=0.334; χ(2)=0.109, P=0.838). There was no significant difference in the mean operation time between the 2 groups(t=0.633, P=0.524). But the time of confirming the target lesions between the 2 groups was statistically different (t=17.41, P<0.01). EBUS-GS-TBLB was well tolerated. No severe complications such as pneumothorax or chest pain were observed. There were 3 patients in the VBNA group and 7 patients in the NVBNA group experiencing a small amount of biopsy site bleeding. The incidence of complications did not differ between the 2 groups(χ(2)=1.366, P=0.330). Conclusions: VBN could not improve the diagnostic yield of EBUS-GS. However, it could shorten the time needed to confirm the target lesions and did not increase the incidence of EBUS-GS complications, indicating that EBUS-GS with VBN was a safe and effective method.