Zaid Zoumot

Endosonography vs Conventional Bronchoscopy for the Diagnosis of Sarcoidosis: The GRANULOMA Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Tissue verification of noncaseating granulomas is recommended for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Bronchoscopy with transbronchial lung biopsies, the current diagnostic standard, has moderate sensitivity in assessing granulomas. Endosonography with intrathoracic nodal aspiration appears to be a promising diagnostic technique. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic yield of bronchoscopy vs endosonography in the diagnosis of stage I/II sarcoidosis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized clinical multicenter trial (14 centers in 6 countries) between March 2009 and November 2011 of 304 consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary sarcoidosis (stage I/II) in whom tissue confirmation of noncaseating granulomas was indicated. INTERVENTIONS Either bronchoscopy with transbronchial and endobronchial lung biopsies or endosonography (esophageal or endobronchial ultrasonography) with aspiration of intrathoracic lymph nodes. All patients also underwent bronchoalveolar lavage. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield for detecting noncaseating granulomas in patients with a final diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The diagnosis was based on final clinical judgment by the treating physician, according to all available information (including findings from initial bronchoscopy or endosonography). Secondary outcomes were the complication rate in both groups and sensitivity and specificity of bronchoalveolar lavage in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. RESULTS A total of 149 patients were randomized to bronchoscopy and 155 to endosonography. Significantly more granulomas were detected at endosonography vs bronchoscopy (114 vs 72 patients; 74% vs 48%; P < .001). Diagnostic yield to detect granulomas for endosonography was 80% (95% CI, 73%-86%); for bronchoscopy, 53% (95% CI, 45%-61%) (P < .001). Two serious adverse events occurred in the bronchoscopy group and 1 in the endosonography group; all patients recovered completely. Sensitivity of the bronchoalveolar lavage for sarcoidosis based on CD4/CD8 ratio was 54% (95% CI, 46%-62%) for flow cytometry and 24% (95% CI, 16%-34%) for cytospin analysis. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE Among patients with suspected stage I/II pulmonary sarcoidosis undergoing tissue confirmation, the use of endosonographic nodal aspiration compared with bronchoscopic biopsy resulted in greater diagnostic yield. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00872612.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with endobronchial valves for patients with heterogeneous emphysema and intact interlobar fissures (the BeLieVeR-HIFi study): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Lung volume reduction surgery improves survival in selected patients with emphysema, and has generated interest in bronchoscopic approaches that might achieve the same effect with less morbidity and mortality. Previous trials with endobronchial valves have yielded modest group benefits because when collateral ventilation is present it prevents lobar atelectasis. METHODS We did a single-centre, double-blind sham-controlled trial in patients with both heterogeneous emphysema and a target lobe with intact interlobar fissures on CT of the thorax. We enrolled stable outpatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who had a forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of less than 50% predicted, significant hyperinflation (total lung capacity >100% and residual volume >150%), a restricted exercise capacity (6 min walking distance <450 m), and substantial breathlessness (MRC dyspnoea score ≥3). Participants were randomised (1:1) by computer-generated sequence to receive either valves placed to achieve unilateral lobar occlusion (bronchoscopic lung volume reduction) or a bronchoscopy with sham valve placement (control). Patients and researchers were masked to treatment allocation. The study was powered to detect a 15% improvement in the primary endpoint, the FEV1 3 months after the procedure. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered at controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN04761234. FINDINGS 50 patients (62% male, FEV1 [% predicted] mean 31·7% [SD 10·2]) were enrolled to receive valves (n=25) or sham valve placement (control, n=25) between March 1, 2012, and Sept 30, 2013. In the bronchoscopic lung volume reduction group, FEV1 increased by a median 8·77% (IQR 2·27-35·85) versus 2·88% (0-8·51) in the control group (Mann-Whitney p=0·0326). There were two deaths in the bronchoscopic lung volume reduction group and one control patient was unable to attend for follow-up assessment because of a prolonged pneumothorax. INTERPRETATION Unilateral lobar occlusion with endobronchial valves in patients with heterogeneous emphysema and intact interlobar fissures produces significant improvements in lung function. There is a risk of significant complications and further trials are needed that compare valve placement with lung volume reduction surgery. FUNDING Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme, funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and managed by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) on behalf of the MRC-NIHR partnership.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with endobronchial valves for patients with heterogeneous emphysema and intact interlobar fissures (The BeLieVeR-HIFi trial): study design and rationale

Although lung volume reduction surgery improves survival in selected patients with emphysema, there has been ongoing interest in developing and evaluating bronchoscopic approaches to try to reduce lung volumes with less morbidity and mortality. The placement of endobronchial valves is one such technique, and although some patients have had a significant improvement, responses have been inconsistent because collateral ventilation prevents lobar atelectasis. We describe the protocol of a trial (ISRCTN04761234) aimed to show that a responder phenotype, patients with heterogeneous emphysema and intact interlobar fissures on CT scanning, can be identified prospectively, leading to a consistent benefit in clinical practice.

Emphysema: time to say farewell to therapeutic nihilism

It is an interesting time for the management of emphysema. In this condition, destruction of lung parenchyma associated with reduced elastic recoil and dynamic airways closure produce gas trapping and increased operating lung volumes, leading to breathlessness and exercise limitation. It has historically been defined as an irreversible process, which has led to a degree of therapeutic nihilism. One manifestation of this has been the curious neglect of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). Clinical guidelines,1 reflecting trial evidence,2 recommend consideration of LVRS in selected patients with upper lobe predominant emphysema and poor exercise capacity, the phenotype where surgery has been shown to produce a survival benefit. Modern surgical techniques, unilateral treatment and improved postoperative care and patient selection mean that LVRS is also associated with lower morbidity and mortality than data published at the turn of the century had suggested,3 ,4 with one recent case series reporting zero 90-day mortality following unilateral surgery.5 Nevertheless, little effort seems to be going into identifying this patient population and LVRS remains vastly underused with just 90 procedures taking place in the UK in 2010–2011. A partial explanation for this may be found in a recent survey of British Thoracic Society members that revealed that a significant proportion overestimated the morbidity and mortality associated with LVRS.6 Only 30% had access to a dedicated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) multidisciplinary meeting to review patients, and there was no consensus as to the correct strategy to adopt to identify appropriate patients. Over the last decade, bronchoscopic approaches for lung volume reduction in emphysema have proliferated. These include one-way endobronchial valves to induce lobar collapse,7–10 airway bypass approaches to create low-resistance extra-anatomical pathways that allow trapped …

Endobronchial Coils for Severe Emphysema Are Effective Up to 12 Months following Treatment: Medium Term and Cross-Over Results from a Randomised Controlled Trial

Background There is a clinical need for therapeutic options to reduce hyperinflation associated with severe emphysema. Endobronchial Coils (coils) are nitinol devices implanted bronchoscopically under fluoroscopic guidance to re-tension the lung. We report the medium term effectiveness and safety of coils in a study of patients with emphysema. Methods Forty five subjects with severe airflow obstruction and hyperinflation received bilateral sequential treatment with coils (30 day interval between treatments) as part of a randomised controlled trial with a primary endpoint 90 days after the final treatment (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01334307). Further assessments were made at 180 and 360 days and in this study the primary outcome was the effect of coil treatment on the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) 360 days following treatment. Results At 360 days following treatment, there was an improvement in the SGRQ score of -6.1±14.0 points (p = 0.01) compared to baseline. Improvements in secondary outcomes were seen with increases in forced expiratory volume in the first second of 8.9 ±22.2% (p = 0.002) and 6-minute walking distance of 34.1±52.4m (p = 0.003). The safety profile was acceptable out to 360 days post-treatment. Conclusions Statistically and clinically meaningful benefits in quality of life, exercise capacity and pulmonary function in patients treated with coils are sustained twelve months after treatment. Trial registration information Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01334307.

Bronchoscopic Coil Treatment for Patients with Severe Emphysema: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: Bronchoscopic coil treatment has been shown to improve pulmonary function, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with severe emphysema. Objectives: To perform a meta-analysis of the results of four independent European clinical trials investigating this coil therapy for emphysema. Methods: Data on all patients included in the four European clinical trials were analyzed for efficacy and safety outcomes. Results: A total of 2,536 coils were placed during 259 procedures in 140 patients. A total of 37 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations and 27 pneumonias were recorded as serious adverse events up to 1 year after treatment. The pneumothorax rate was 6.4%. Both 6 and 12 months after treatment, significant (all p < 0.001) improvements were observed for: forced expiratory volume in 1 s [+0.08 liters (±0.19) and +0.08 liters (±0.21)], residual volume [RV; -510 ml (±850) and -430 ml (±720)], 6-min walking distance [6MWD; +44.1 m (±69.8) and +38.1 m (±71.9)], and St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire score [SGRQ; -9.5 points (±14.3) and -7.7 points (±14.2)]. No differences in any outcome measures were observed between heterogeneous and homogeneous emphysema patients. Only a high baseline RV was found to be an independent predictor of successful treatment. Conclusions: Bronchoscopic coil treatment improves pulmonary function, 6MWD, and quality of life in patients with severe emphysema up to 1 year after treatment, independent of the distribution of the disease.

Lung Volume Reduction in Emphysema Improves Chest Wall Asynchrony

BACKGROUND: Lung volume reduction (LVR) techniques improve lung function in selected patients with emphysema, but the impact of LVR procedures on the asynchronous movement of different chest wall compartments, which is a feature of emphysema, is not known. METHODS: We used optoelectronic plethysmography to assess the effect of surgical and bronchoscopic LVR on chest wall asynchrony. Twenty-six patients were assessed before and 3 months after LVR (surgical [n = 9] or bronchoscopic [n = 7]) or a sham/unsuccessful bronchoscopic treatment (control subjects, n = 10). Chest wall volumes were divided into six compartments (left and right of each of pulmonary ribcage [Vrc,p], abdominal ribcage [Vrc,a], and abdomen [Vab]) and phase shift angles (θ) calculated for the asynchrony between Vrc,p and Vrc,a (θRC), and between Vrc,a and Vab (θDIA). RESULTS: Participants had an FEV1 of 34.6 ± 18% predicted and a residual volume of 217.8 ± 46.0% predicted with significant chest wall asynchrony during quiet breathing at baseline (θRC, 31.3° ± 38.4°; and θDIA, −38.7° ± 36.3°). Between-group difference in the change in θRC and θDIA during quiet breathing following treatment was 44.3° (95% CI, −78 to −10.6; P = .003) and 34.5° (95% CI, 1.4 to 67.5; P = .007) toward 0° (representing perfect synchrony), respectively, favoring the LVR group. Changes in θRC and θDIA were statistically significant on the treated but not the untreated sides. CONCLUSIONS: Successful LVR significantly reduces chest wall asynchrony in patients with emphysema.

Effective Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Accelerates Exercise Oxygen Uptake Kinetics in Emphysema

BACKGROUND The impact of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) on physiologic responses to exercise in patients with advanced emphysema remains incompletely understood. We hypothesized that effective BLVR (e-BLVR), defined as a reduction in residual volume > 350 mL, would improve cardiovascular responses to exercise and accelerate oxygen uptake (Vo₂) kinetics. METHODS Thirty-one patients (FEV1, 36% ± 9% predicted; residual volume, 219% ± 57% predicted) underwent a constant intensity exercise test at 70% peak work rate to the limit of tolerance before and after treatment bronchoscopy (n = 24) or sham bronchoscopy (n = 7). Physiologic responses in patients who had e-BLVR (n = 16) were compared with control subjects (ineffective BLVR or sham bronchoscopy; n = 15). RESULTS e-BLVR reduced residual volume (-1.1 ± 0.5 L, P = .001), improved lung diffusing capacity by 12% ± 13% (P = .001), and increased exercise tolerance by 181 ± 214 s (P = .004). Vo₂ kinetics were accelerated in the e-BLVR group but remained unchanged in control subjects (Δ mean response time, -20% ± 29% vs 1% ± 25%, P = .04). Acceleration of Vo₂ kinetics was associated with reductions in heart rate and oxygen pulse response half-times by 8% (84 ± 14 to 76 ± 15 s, P = .04) and 20% (49 ± 16 to 34 ± 16 s, P = .01), respectively. There were also increases in heart rate and oxygen pulse amplitudes during the cardiodynamic phase post e-BLVR. Faster Vo₂ kinetics in the e-BLVR group were significantly correlated with reductions in residual volume (r = 0.66, P = .005) and improvements in inspiratory reserve volume (r = 0.56, P = .024) and exercise tolerance (r = 0.63, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS Lung deflation induced by e-BLVR accelerated exercise Vo₂ kinetics in patients with emphysema. This beneficial effect appears to be related mechanistically to an enhanced cardiovascular response to exercise, which may contribute to improved functional capacity.

Bronchoscopic Intrabullous Autologous Blood Instillation: A Novel Approach for the Treatment of Giant Bullae

The current standard therapy for patients with giant bullae is surgical bullectomy; however, high operative risk and comorbidities preclude surgical procedures in many patients. Autologous blood instilled directly into bullae can induce an inflammatory reaction, leading to scarring, fibrosis, and ultimately volume loss. We have treated 5 patients with this minimally invasive approach as day-case procedures using moderate sedation. Three of the 5 patients had shrinkage of the bullae, leading to large and clinically meaningful improvements in lung function, exercise capacity, and quality of life 3 months after treatment.

An unusual case of haemoptysis

A 65-year-old Filipino man presented with a cough productive of heavily bloodstained sputum for 1 month with slight weight loss. He had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from a 60 pack-year smoking history, having quit 20 years previously, and his chronic mild dyspnoea was stable. He had been treated for pulmonary tuberculosis 9 years previously but had not travelled abroad for 3 years. He had no …