RESUMO
Background: Endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is the standard for evaluating mediastinal and hilar lesions. EBUS-TBNA is limited by small volume of material obtained for immunohistochemistry (IHC) and ancillary studies important for oncological therapies. The Franseen AcquireTM needle is designed for EBUS-transbronchial needle core biopsy (TBNB) allowing larger core sizes with evidence in gastroenterology literature but little in pulmonology. This study reports the first Asia-Pacific experience of EBUS-TBNB and adequacy of samples for diagnosis and ancillary studies. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of EBUS-TBNB at the Royal Adelaide Hospital was conducted between December 2019 and May 2021. Diagnostic rate, adequacy for ancillary studies and complications were evaluated. Samples were flushed into formalin for histological processing with no rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE). For suspected lymphoma, samples were flushed into HANKS for flow cytometry. Cases performed with the Olympus VizishotTM during the same 18-month were similarly analysed. Results: One hundred and eighty-nine patients were sampled with the AcquireTM needle. Diagnostic rate was 174/189 (92.1%). Where reported [146/189 (77.2%)], average core aggregate sample size was 13.4 mm × 10.7 mm × 1.7 mm. For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases, 45/49 (91.8%) had adequate tissue for programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). 32/35 (91.4%) adenocarcinoma cases had sufficient tissue for ancillary studies. There was one false negative malignant lymph node at the first AcquireTM procedure. There were no major complications. One hundred and one patients were sampled with the VizishotTM needle. Diagnostic rate was 86/101 (85.1%) with only 25/101 (24.8%) having reported tissue cores (P<0.0001 of VizishotTM) with the remaining samples processed via cell block. Conclusions: AcquireTM EBUS-TBNB diagnostic rate is comparable to historical data with >90% of cases having sufficient core material for ancillary studies. There appears to be a role for the AcquireTM alongside the standard of care for the work up of lymphadenopathy and particularly for lung cancer.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Rapid response systems designed to detect and respond to clinical deterioration often incorporate a multitiered, escalation response. We sought to determine the 'predictive strength' of commonly used triggers, and tiers of escalation, for predicting a rapid response team (RRT) call, unanticipated intensive care unit admission, or cardiac arrest (events). DESIGN: This was a nested, matched case-control study. SETTING: The study setting involved a tertiary referral hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Cases experienced an event, and controls were matched patients without an event. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were measured. Logistic regression determined the set of triggers with the highest AUC. RESULTS: There were 321 cases and 321 controls. Nurse triggers occurred in 62%, medical review triggers in 34%, and RRT triggers 20%. Positive predictive value of nurse triggers was 59%, that of medical review triggers was 75%, and that of RRT triggers was 88%. These values were no different when modifications to triggers were considered. The AUC was 0.61 for nurses, 0.67 for medical review, and 0.65 for RRT triggers. With modelling, the AUC was 0.63 for the lowest tier, 0.71 for next highest, and 0.73 for the highest tier. CONCLUSION: For a three-tiered system, at the lowest tier, specificity of triggers decreases, sensitivity increases, but the discriminatory power is poor. Thus, there is little to be gained by using a rapid response system with more than two tiers. Modifications to triggers reduced the potential number of escalations and did not affect tier discriminatory value.
