Background and objective: Percutaneous lung biopsy for diagnostic sampling of peripheral lung nodules has been widely performed by interventional radiologists under computed tomography (CT) guidance. New technology allows pulmonologists to perform percutaneous lung biopsies using electromagnetic (EM) guided technology. With the adoption of this new technique, the safety, feasibility and diagnostic yield need to be explored. The goal of this study was to determine the safety, feasibility and diagnostic yield of EM-guided percutaneous lung biopsy performed by pulmonologists. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicentre study of 129 EM-guided percutaneous lung biopsies that occurred between November 2013 and March 2017. The study consisted of seven academic and three community medical centres. Results: The average age of participants was 65.6 years, BMI was 26.3 and 50.4% were females. The majority of lesions were in the right upper lobe (37.2%) and left upper lobe (31.8%). The mean size of the lesions was 27.31 mm and the average distance from the pleura was 13.2 mm. Practitioners averaged two fine-needle aspirates and five core biopsies per procedure. There were 23 (17.8%) pneumothoraces, of which 16 (12.4%) received small-bore chest tube placement. The diagnostic yield of percutaneous lung biopsy was 73.7%. When EM-guided bronchoscopic sampling was also performed during the same procedural encounter, the overall diagnostic yield increased to 81.1%. Conclusion: In this large multicentred series, the use of EM guidance for percutaneous lung biopsies was safe and feasible, with acceptable diagnostic yield in the hands of pulmonologists. A prospective multicentre trial to validate these findings is currently underway (NCT03338049).
The use of intrapleural therapy with tissue plasminogen activator and DNase improves outcomes in patients with complicated pleural space infections. However, little data exists for the use of combination intrapleural therapy after the initial dosing period of six doses. We sought to describe the safety profile and outcomes of intrapleural therapy beyond this standard dosing. A retrospective review of patients receiving intrapleural therapy with tissue plasminogen activator and DNase was performed at two institutions. We identified 101 patients from January 2013 to August 2015 receiving intrapleural therapy for complicated pleural space infection. The extended use of intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator and DNase therapy beyond six doses was utilized in 20% (20/101) of patients. The mean number of doses in those undergoing extended dosing was 9.8 (range of 7–16). Within the population studied there appears to be no statistically significant increased risk of complications, need for surgical referral, or outcome differences when comparing those receiving standard or extended dosing intrapleural therapy. Future prospective study of intrapleural therapy as an alternative option for patients who fail initial pleural drainage and are unable to tolerate/accept a surgical intervention appears a potential area of study.
ImportanceCancer screening deficits during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were found to persist into 2021. Cancer-related deaths over the next decade are projected to increase if these deficits are not addressed.ObjectiveTo assess whether participation in a nationwide quality improvement (QI) collaborative, Return-to-Screening, was associated with restoration of cancer screening.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsAccredited cancer programs electively enrolled in this QI study. Project-specific targets were established on the basis of differences in mean monthly screening test volumes (MTVs) between representative prepandemic (September 2019 and January 2020) and pandemic (September 2020 and January 2021) periods to restore prepandemic volumes and achieve a minimum of 10% increase in MTV. Local QI teams implemented evidence-based screening interventions from June to November 2021 (intervention period), iteratively adjusting interventions according to their MTVs and target. Interrupted time series analyses was used to identify the intervention effect. Data analysis was performed from January to April 2022.ExposuresCollaborative QI support included provision of a Return-to-Screening plan-do-study-act protocol, evidence-based screening interventions, QI education, programmatic coordination, and calculation of screening deficits and targets.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of QI projects reaching target MTV and counterfactual differences in the aggregate number of screening tests across time periods.ResultsOf 859 cancer screening QI projects (452 for breast cancer, 134 for colorectal cancer, 244 for lung cancer, and 29 for cervical cancer) conducted by 786 accredited cancer programs, 676 projects (79%) reached their target MTV. There were no hospital characteristics associated with increased likelihood of reaching target MTV except for disease site (lung vs breast, odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7 to 4.7). During the preintervention period (April to May 2021), there was a decrease in the mean MTV (slope, −13.1 tests per month; 95% CI, −23.1 to −3.2 tests per month). Interventions were associated with a significant immediate (slope, 101.0 tests per month; 95% CI, 49.1 to 153.0 tests per month) and sustained (slope, 36.3 tests per month; 95% CI, 5.3 to 67.3 tests per month) increase in MTVs relative to the preintervention trends. Additional screening tests were performed during the intervention period compared with the prepandemic period (170 748 tests), the pandemic period (210 450 tests), and the preintervention period (722 427 tests).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this QI study, participation in a national Return-to-Screening collaborative with a multifaceted QI intervention was associated with improvements in cancer screening. Future collaborative QI endeavors leveraging accreditation infrastructure may help address other gaps in cancer care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.