Pulmonology Department, Hospital Universitari Mútua Terrassa, University of Barcelona, Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain.
Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain.
Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2024 Jan-Dec;18:17534666241301284. doi: 10.1177/17534666241301284.
The role of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) validated with video-assisted mediastinoscopic lymphadenectomy (VAMLA) for mediastinal restaging of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after induction therapy has never been described.
To report on our experience in this clinical setting.
Retrospective analysis of a prospectively built database.
Patients with stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC who underwent EBUS-TBNA for mediastinal restaging after induction therapy were included. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNA and VAMLA for mediastinal restaging were calculated. The number of patients needed to undergo confirmatory VAMLA (NNT) after a negative EBUS-TBNA for mediastinal restaging to avoid a case of pathologic (p) N2 disease after resection was also calculated.
Forty-six patients underwent EBUS-TBNA which was positive in 12 patients and negative in 34. Patients with a negative EBUS-TBNA underwent VAMLA which was positive in seven cases. Of the other 27 patients with a negative VAMLA, 26 underwent resection that did not show N2 disease. The sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV, and diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNA for restaging were 63.1%, 100%, 79.4%, 100%, and 84.7%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV, and diagnostic accuracy of confirmatory VAMLA after EBUS-TBNA was 100%. The NNT confirmatory VAMLA after a negative EBUS-TBNA to avoid a case of pN2 disease at resection was five patients.
EBUS-TBNA must remain as the first-choice test for invasive mediastinal restaging. However, the results of our study in terms of sensitivity and NPV, even considering the small size of our population, suggest that negative results of EBUS-TBNA should be interpreted with caution and surgical exploration of the mediastinum (specially VAMLA, if available) should be considered in these patients.
经支气管超声引导针吸活检术(EBUS-TBNA)与电视辅助纵隔镜淋巴结切除术(VAMLA)联合用于诱导治疗后非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的纵隔重新分期,其作用尚未得到验证。
报告我们在这一临床环境中的经验。
前瞻性建立数据库的回顾性分析。
纳入接受诱导治疗后行 EBUS-TBNA 纵隔重新分期的 IIIA 期(N2)NSCLC 患者。计算 EBUS-TBNA 和 VAMLA 对纵隔重新分期的敏感性、特异性、阴性预测值(NPV)、阳性预测值(PPV)和诊断准确性。还计算了在阴性 EBUS-TBNA 后进行确认性 VAMLA(NNTVAMLA)以避免切除后病理(p)N2 疾病的患者数量。
46 例患者接受了 EBUS-TBNA,其中 12 例为阳性,34 例为阴性。EBUS-TBNA 阴性的患者接受了 VAMLA,其中 7 例为阳性。在另外 27 例 VAMLA 阴性的患者中,26 例接受了未显示 N2 疾病的切除术。EBUS-TBNA 重新分期的敏感性、特异性、NPV、PPV 和诊断准确性分别为 63.1%、100%、79.4%、100%和 84.7%。EBUS-TBNA 后行确认性 VAMLA 的敏感性、特异性、NPV、PPV 和诊断准确性为 100%。阴性 EBUS-TBNA 后避免切除时 pN2 疾病的 NNTVAMLA 为 5 例。
EBUS-TBNA 仍然是侵袭性纵隔重新分期的首选检查方法。然而,考虑到我们的研究人群规模较小,我们的研究结果在敏感性和 NPV 方面表明,EBUS-TBNA 的阴性结果应谨慎解读,并应考虑对这些患者进行纵隔手术探查(特别是如果可行的话,VAMLA)。