Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA.
Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Chest. 2020 Nov;158(5):2015-2025. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.05.532. Epub 2020 May 25.
Challenges remain for establishing a specific diagnosis in cases of interstitial lung disease (ILD). Bronchoscopic lung cryobiopsy (BLC) has impacted the diagnostic impression and confidence of multidisciplinary discussions (MDDs) in the evaluation of ILD. Reports indicate that a genomic classifier (GC) can distinguish usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) from non-UIP.
What is the impact of sequentially presented data from BLC and GC on the diagnostic confidence of MDDs in diagnosing ILD?
Two MDD teams met to discuss 24 patients with ILD without a definitive UIP pattern. MDD1 sequentially reviewed clinical-radiologic findings, BLC, and GC. MDD2 sequentially reviewed GC before BLC. At each step in the process the MDD diagnosis and confidence level were recorded.
MDD1 had a significant increase in diagnostic confidence, from 43% to 93% (P = .023), in patients with probable UIP after the addition of GC to BLC. MDD2 had an increase in diagnostic confidence, from 27% to 73% (P = .074), after the addition of BLC to GC. The concordance coefficients and percentage agreement of categorical idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and non-IPF diagnoses were as follows: GC vs MDD1: 0.92, 96%; GC vs MDD2: 0.83, 92%; BLC1 vs MDD1: 0.67, 83%; BLC2 vs MDD2: 0.66, 83%.
GC increased diagnostic confidence when added to BLC for patients with a probable UIP pattern, and in appropriate clinical settings can be used without BLC. In contrast, BLC had the greatest impact regarding a specific diagnosis when the likelihood of UIP was considered low following clinical-radiographic review.
在间质性肺病(ILD)的病例中,建立明确诊断仍然存在挑战。支气管镜肺冷冻活检(BLC)影响了ILD 评估中多学科讨论(MDD)的诊断印象和信心。有报告表明,基因组分类器(GC)可区分普通间质性肺炎(UIP)和非 UIP。
BLC 和 GC 顺序呈现的数据对 MDD 诊断 ILD 的诊断信心有何影响?
两个 MDD 团队对 24 名无明确 UIP 模式的 ILD 患者进行了讨论。MDD1 依次审查了临床放射学发现、BLC 和 GC。MDD2 则在 BLC 之前依次审查了 GC。在该过程的每一步中,都记录了 MDD 的诊断和信心水平。
在将 GC 添加到 BLC 后,MDD1 对可能患有 UIP 的患者的诊断信心从 43%显著增加到 93%(P=0.023)。在将 BLC 添加到 GC 后,MDD2 的诊断信心从 27%增加到 73%(P=0.074)。分类特发性肺纤维化(IPF)和非 IPF 诊断的一致性系数和百分比一致性如下:GC 与 MDD1:0.92,96%;GC 与 MDD2:0.83,92%;BLC1 与 MDD1:0.67,83%;BLC2 与 MDD2:0.66,83%。
当添加到可能患有 UIP 模式的患者的 BLC 时,GC 增加了诊断信心,并且在适当的临床环境中可以在不进行 BLC 的情况下使用。相比之下,当临床影像学检查后认为 UIP 的可能性较低时,BLC 对特定诊断的影响最大。