Diagnostic Yield of Cone-beam-Derived Augmented Fluoroscopy and Ultrathin Bronchoscopy Versus Conventional Navigational Bronchoscopy Techniques

Abstract

Background: Pulmonary nodules suspicious for lung cancer are frequently diagnosed. Evaluating and optimizing the diagnostic yield of lung nodule biopsy is critical as innovation in bronchoscopy continues to progress. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Consecutive patients undergoing guided bronchoscopy for suspicious pulmonary nodule(s) between February 2020 and July 2021 were included. The cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)+ radial endobronchial ultrasound (r-EBUS) group had their procedure using CBCT-derived augmented fluoroscopy along with r-EBUS. The CBCT+ ultrathin bronchoscope (UTB)+r-EBUS group had the same procedure but with the use of an ultrathin bronchoscope. The r-EBUS group underwent r-EBUS guidance without CBCT or augmented fluoroscopy. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare diagnostic yield, adjusting for confounding variables. Results: A total of 116 patients were included. The median pulmonary lesion diameter was 19.5 mm (interquartile range, 15.0 to 27.5 mm), and 91 (78.4%) were in the peripheral half of the lung. Thirty patients (25.9%) underwent CBCT+UTB, 27 (23.3%) CBCT, and 59 (50.9%) r-EBUS alone with unadjusted diagnostic yields of 86.7%, 70.4%, and 42.4%, respectively (P<0.001). The adjusted diagnostic yields were 85.0% (95% CI, 68.6% to 100%), 68.3% (95% CI, 50.1% to 86.6%), and 44.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 58.0%), respectively. There was significantly more virtual navigational bronchoscopy use in the r-EBUS group (45.8%) compared with the CBCT+UTB (13.3%) and CBCT (18.5%) groups, respectively. CBCT procedures required dose area product radiation doses of 7602.5 µGym2. Conclusion: Compared with the r-EBUS group, CBCT + UTB + r-EBUS was associated with higher navigational success, fewer nondiagnostic biopsy results, and a higher diagnostic yield. CBCT procedures are associated with a considerable radiation dose. 7copy; 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.