Ng Jeffrey, Kim Seyoung, Chang Boksoon, Lee Kyungjong, Um Sang-Won, Kim Hojoong, Jeong Byeong-Ho
Division of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, University Medicine Cluster, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Department of Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
J Thorac Dis. 2019 Mar;11(3):1056-1064. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.12.130.
There are few reports comparing flexible and rigid bronchoscopy in adult foreign body (FB) aspiration. The aim of this retrospective study was to review the clinical characteristics, outcomes and factors associated with success in adult patients who underwent flexible or rigid bronchoscopy for airway FB removal.
We retrospectively reviewed the records of 103 patients who underwent bronchoscopy to remove airway FB at Samsung Medical Center, South Korea from January 1999 to March 2017.
The median patient age was 64 years, and 70% were males. Among the 54 patients who underwent flexible bronchoscopy as first-line treatment, 43 (80%) patients had their FB successfully removed. Previous attempts at other hospitals was significantly associated with failed flexible bronchoscopy [9/11 (82%) 3/43 (7%), P<0.001]. Delayed diagnosis (median 29 5 days, P=0.074) and peripherally located airway FB [9/12 (75%) 23/48 (48%), P=0.115] were factors that trended towards flexible bronchoscopy failure. All of the 59 patients who underwent rigid bronchoscopy had their FB successfully removed. Rigid bronchoscopy was preferred to flexible bronchoscopy in patients with no comorbidities [38/59 (64%) 18/44 (41%), P=0.018], previous attempts at other hospitals [34/59 (58%) 4/44 (9%), P<0.001], delayed diagnosis (median 162 5 days, P<0.001), and hard FBs [48/62 (77%) 21/49 (43%), P<0.001].
Our data suggest that previous failed attempts and delayed diagnosis are associated with flexible bronchoscopy failure. However, rigid bronchoscopy could be effective in removing an airway FB even in these cases. Further studies to identify factors to facilitate optimal patient selection will minimize failure rates and optimize resource utilization.
关于成人异物吸入时柔性支气管镜检查与刚性支气管镜检查的比较报道较少。这项回顾性研究的目的是回顾接受柔性或刚性支气管镜检查以清除气道异物的成年患者的临床特征、治疗结果以及与成功相关的因素。
我们回顾性分析了1999年1月至2017年3月在韩国三星医疗中心接受支气管镜检查以清除气道异物的103例患者的记录。
患者的中位年龄为64岁,70%为男性。在54例接受柔性支气管镜检查作为一线治疗的患者中,43例(80%)成功取出异物。在其他医院的既往尝试与柔性支气管镜检查失败显著相关[9/11(82%)对3/43(7%),P<0.001]。延迟诊断(中位时间29±5天,P=0.074)和气道外周异物[9/12(75%)对23/48(48%),P=0.115]是倾向于导致柔性支气管镜检查失败的因素。所有59例接受刚性支气管镜检查的患者均成功取出异物。在无合并症的患者中[38/59(64%)对18/44(41%),P=0.018]、在其他医院有既往尝试的患者中[34/59(58%)对4/44(9%),P<0.001]、延迟诊断的患者中(中位时间162±5天,P<0.001)以及坚硬异物的患者中[48/62(77%)对21/49(43%),P<0.001],刚性支气管镜检查比柔性支气管镜检查更受青睐。
我们的数据表明,既往尝试失败和延迟诊断与柔性支气管镜检查失败有关。然而,即使在这些情况下,刚性支气管镜检查在清除气道异物方面可能也是有效的。进一步研究以确定有助于优化患者选择的因素将使失败率降至最低并优化资源利用。