We compared the diagnostic performances of conventional smears and cell block preparations of tissue samples obtained with endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration. We retrospectively analysed 451 patients (926 lymph nodes) who had undergone endobronchial ultrasound and for whom both smears and cell blocks were available and compared the diagnostic performances of these techniques when used alone and combined. Cell block preparations showed higher diagnostic performance over smears, but the combination was superior to either alone. The combination of smear and cell block techniques achieved a sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of 92.5, 100, 100, 97.7 and 99.4, 95.0, 98.6, and 97.9 % for malignant and benign diseases, respectively. We recommend cell block preparations during endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration.

In this retrospective analysis, the standardized sonographic classification system and the proposed algorithm performed well in choosing the node that should be sampled in a particular station during endobronchial ultrasound.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Transbronchial needle aspiration using endobronchial ultrasonography (EBUS-TBNA), a new minimally invasive diagnostic procedure, has been used to evaluate intrathoracic lymph nodes. It has been reported that EBUS-TBNA can be performed safely under sedation and provides a high level of patient satisfaction. We aimed to describe perianesthetic data, and compare results regarding the agents of subjects undergoing EBUS-TBNA under deep sedation. METHODS: After ethics committee approval, perianesthetic data of 571 subjects undergoing EBUS-TBNA were analyzed retrospectively. Data were collected from anesthesia evaluation and observation forms. Four groups received anesthesia in the operating room as follows: propofol-midazolam (group PM), propofol-ketamine (group PK), propofol-ketamine-midazolam (group PKM), or propofol (group P). Dosage, number of anesthetic injection, hemodynamic variables, recovery time, complications, and patient satisfaction were also recorded. RESULTS: Propofol consumption was higher in groups P and PM compared with groups PK and PKM. Midazolam requirement was higher in group PM than in group PKM. Recovery time was shorter in group P compared with groups PK, PM, and PKM. It was also shorter in groups PK and PM compared with group PKM. All of these differences were statistically significant. Temporary desaturation (n ‫؍‬ 41; 7%) and increased blood pressure (n ‫؍‬ 78; 14%) were predominant complications. In groups PK and PKM, risk of developing hypertension was higher than in groups PM and P (P < .001). The percentage of subjects satisfied with the procedure was 99%. CONCLUSIONS: Independent from the sedative agent, deep sedation can be safe, and provide high patient satisfaction during EBUS-TBNA. The combination of ketamine with propofol or midazolam required lower doses of these anesthetics. However, the incidence of increased blood pressure was higher in groups administered ketamine. Recovery time was the shortest in group P, and the longest in group PKM. There was no relation between recovery time and total dose of anesthetics or presence of chronic disease.

No abstract

Cryorecanalization is a successful and safe intervention for the immediate management of endobronchial stenosis. Appropriate patient selection and high success rates should be achieved after careful radiological assessments and with early management.

EBUS-TBNA may be an initial diagnostic procedure in SCLC. Patients with only hilar/mediastinal masses without any endobronchial lesion could be directed to centers with the capability for performing EBUS-TBNA to have a rapid diagnosis without any time loss.

When the diagnostic benefits and complication rates were considered, two cryobiopsies were found to be optimal for endobronchial tumors. In patients with non-diagnostic conventional bronchoscopy, endobronchial tumors may be diagnosed by cryobiopsy.