Improved diagnostic sensitivity of bronchsocopy for the investigation of peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs) with the use of radial probe endobroncial ultrasound (EBUS) has been reported, although diagnostic performance varies considerably.A systematic review of published literature evaluating radial probe EBUS accuracy was performed to determine point sensitivity and specificity, and to construct a summary receiveroperating characteristic curve. Sub-group analysis and linear regression was used to identify possible sources of study heterogeneity.16 studies with 1,420 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria. Significant inter-study variation in EBUS method was noted. EBUS had point specificity of 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.00) and point sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.76) for the detection of lung cancer, with a positive likelihood ratio of 26.84 (12.60-57.20) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.28 (0.23-0.36). Significant interstudy heterogeneity for sensitivity was observed, with prevalence of malignancy, lesion size and reference standard used being possible sources.EBUS is a safe and relatively accurate tool in the investigation of PPLs. Diagnostic sensitivity of EBUS may be influenced by the prevalence of malignancy in the patient cohort being examined and lesion size. Further methodologically rigorous studies on well-defined patient populations are required to evaluate the generalisability of our results.

No abstract

Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Annual chest x-ray screening versus usual care (no regular screening), Outcome 3 Deaths from all causes

There is some low quality evidence that shows benefit for the use of oral or parenteral opioids to palliate breathlessness, although the number of included participants was small. We found no evidence to support the use of nebulised opioids. Further research with larger numbers of participants, using standardised protocols and with quality of life measures included, is needed.

No abstract

Background: Surgery is considered the treatment of choice for patients with resectable stage I and II (and some patients with stage IIIA) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but there have been no previously published systematic reviews. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted to determine whether surgical resection improves disease specific mortality in patients with stages I-IIIA NSCLC compared with non-surgical treatment, and to compare the efficacy of different surgical approaches. Results: Eleven trials were included. No studies had untreated control groups. In a pooled analysis of three trials, 4 year survival was superior in patients undergoing resection with stage I-IIIA NSCLC who had complete mediastinal lymph node dissection compared with lymph node sampling (hazard ratio estimated at 0.78 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.93)). Another trial reported an increased rate of local recurrence in patients with stage I NSCLC treated with limited resection compared with lobectomy. One small study reported a survival advantage among patients with stage IIIA NSCLC treated with chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy. No other trials reported significant improvements in survival after surgery compared with non-surgical treatment. Conclusion: It is difficult to draw conclusions about the efficacy of surgery for locoregional NSCLC because of the small number of participants studied and methodological weaknesses of the trials. However, current evidence suggests that complete mediastinal lymph node dissection is associated with improved survival compared with node sampling in patients with stage I-IIIA NSCLC undergoing resection.

GM quantification in BAL fluid at an OD index cutoff value of 1.5 has excellent sensitivity and specificity to assist clinical decision-making in confirming or excluding a diagnosis of IA when results are interpreted with clinical findings. Additional research investigating the effects of antifungal agents, optimal timing and processing of BAL sampling are needed to improve the diagnostic accuracy of BAL-GM testing.

No abstract