Medtronic. Dr. Nead has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr. Bowling has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr. Murgu has received personal fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Pinnacle Biologics, Olympus, Cook, Auris Robotics, and Elsevier; and has stock ownership in Concordia, Boston Scientific, and Merck. Dr. Krimsky has received personal fees from Medtronic, Innovital Systems, Gala Therapeutic, SOC, and Peytant; has stock ownership with Innovital Systems and CSA Medical; and has patents pending with Medtronic and Merit. Dr. Murillo has received support from Medtronic. Dr. LeMense has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr. Minnich has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr. Bansal has received personal fees from Medtronic, Pinnacle Biologics, Sunovion, and Veran Medical. Dr. Ellis has received support from Medtronic. Dr. Mahajan has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr. Gildea has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr. Bechara has received support from Medtronic. Dr. Sztejman has received support from Medtronic. Dr. Flandes has received grants from BTG-PneumRx and Ambu; and personal fees from Medtronic, BTG-PneumRx, Olympus, Ambu, PulmonX, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Rickman has received personal fees from Medtronic, Veran Medical, BD, Olympus, and Abbvie. Dr. Benzaquen has received support from Medtronic. Dr. Hogarth has received personal fees from Medtronic, Auris Surgical Robotics, Boston Scientific, Grifols, Shire, and CSL; and has stock ownership with Auris Surgical Robotics. Dr. Linden has received support from Medtronic. Dr. Wahidi has received personal fees from Medtronic and Veran Medical. Dr. Mattingley has received personal fees from Medtronic and is current employee of Medtronic (employment began after completion of enrollment). Dr. Hood is an employee with stock ownership at Medtronic; and has stock ownership with Boston Scientific. Ms. Lin and Ms. Wolvers are employees with stock ownership at Medtronic. Dr. Khandar has received personal fees from Medtronic.

BackgroundThe annual incidence of a small indeterminate pulmonary nodule (IPN) on computed tomography (CT) scan remains high. While traditional paradigms exist, the integration of new technologies into these diagnostic and treatment algorithms can result in alternative, potentially more efficient methods of managing these findings.MethodsWe report on an alternative diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for the management of an IPN. This approach combines electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy (ENB) with an updated approach to placement of a pleural dye marker. This technique lends itself to a minimally invasive wedge resection via either video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or a robotic approach.ResultsSubsequent to alterations in the procedure, a cohort of 22 patients with an IPN was reviewed. Navigation was possible in 21 out of 22 patients with one patient excluded based on airway anatomy. The remaining 21 patients underwent ENB with pleural dye marking followed by minimally invasive wedge resection. The median size of the nodules was 13.4 mm (range: 7–29). There were no complications from the ENB procedure. Indigo carmine dye was used in ten patients. Methylene blue was used in the remaining 11 patients. In 81% of cases, the visceral pleural marker was visible at the time of surgery. In one patient, there was diffuse staining of the parietal pleura. In three additional patients, no dye was identified within the hemithorax. In all cases where dye marker was present on the visceral pleural surface, it was in proximity to the IPN and part of the excised specimen.ConclusionsENB with pleural dye marking can provide a safe and effective method to localize an IPN and can allow for subsequent minimally invasive resection. Depending on the characteristics and location of the nodule, this method may allow more rapid identification intraoperatively.

No abstract

Traditional approaches to managing occluded airways include surgery, mechanical debulking, brachytherapy, stents, photodynamic therapy, and thermal modalities, such as electrocautery, laser, argon plasma coagulation, and cryotherapy. Although cryotherapy with cryoprobes has been used safely for over a decade in airways management, it is often tedious and time-consuming because of surface area limitations of the probes, which must be inserted into or come in contact with the surface of the targeted lesion. Newer cryotherapy devices obviate the need for contact with the target tissue. Reports of promising results from use of low-pressure spray cryotherapy for ablation of esophageal lesions 1-2 have led to the experience reported here, in which spray cryotherapy with low-pressure liquid nitrogen was used for the first time to treat human airways.

Initial experience with SC for benign airway strictures suggests that this can be used safely. This is effective in improving symptoms and reducing the severity of airway narrowing. Re-intervention is still required. Further study should be undertaken to determine factors that may be associated with success or failure as well as the relative efficacy of SC compared with other endoscopic therapies.