Cargando…

Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction. Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) is a procedure that provides access to the mediastinal staging; however, EBUS cannot be used to stage all of the nodes in the mediastinum. In these cases, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is used for complete staging. Objective. To provide a synthesis of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Labarca, Gonzalo, Aravena, Carlos, Ortega, Francisco, Arenas, Alex, Majid, Adnan, Folch, Erik, Mehta, Hiren J., Jantz, Michael A., Fernandez-Bussy, Sebastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5081694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27818796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1024709
_version_ 1782462932876001280
author Labarca, Gonzalo
Aravena, Carlos
Ortega, Francisco
Arenas, Alex
Majid, Adnan
Folch, Erik
Mehta, Hiren J.
Jantz, Michael A.
Fernandez-Bussy, Sebastian
author_facet Labarca, Gonzalo
Aravena, Carlos
Ortega, Francisco
Arenas, Alex
Majid, Adnan
Folch, Erik
Mehta, Hiren J.
Jantz, Michael A.
Fernandez-Bussy, Sebastian
author_sort Labarca, Gonzalo
collection PubMed
description Introduction. Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) is a procedure that provides access to the mediastinal staging; however, EBUS cannot be used to stage all of the nodes in the mediastinum. In these cases, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is used for complete staging. Objective. To provide a synthesis of the evidence on the diagnostic performance of EBUS + EUS in patients undergoing mediastinal staging. Methods. Systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic yield of EBUS + EUS compared with surgical staging. Two researchers performed the literature search, quality assessments, data extractions, and analyses. We produced a meta-analysis including sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio analysis. Results. Twelve primary studies (1515 patients) were included; two were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ten were prospective trials. The pooled sensitivity for combined EBUS + EUS was 87% (CI 84–89%) and the specificity was 99% (CI 98–100%). For EBUS + EUS performed with a single bronchoscope group, the sensitivity improved to 88% (CI 83.1–91.4%) and specificity improved to 100% (CI 99-100%). Conclusion. EBUS + EUS is a highly accurate and safe procedure. The combined procedure should be considered in selected patients with lymphadenopathy noted at stations that are not traditionally accessible with conventional EBUS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5081694
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50816942016-11-06 Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Labarca, Gonzalo Aravena, Carlos Ortega, Francisco Arenas, Alex Majid, Adnan Folch, Erik Mehta, Hiren J. Jantz, Michael A. Fernandez-Bussy, Sebastian Pulm Med Review Article Introduction. Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) is a procedure that provides access to the mediastinal staging; however, EBUS cannot be used to stage all of the nodes in the mediastinum. In these cases, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is used for complete staging. Objective. To provide a synthesis of the evidence on the diagnostic performance of EBUS + EUS in patients undergoing mediastinal staging. Methods. Systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic yield of EBUS + EUS compared with surgical staging. Two researchers performed the literature search, quality assessments, data extractions, and analyses. We produced a meta-analysis including sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio analysis. Results. Twelve primary studies (1515 patients) were included; two were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ten were prospective trials. The pooled sensitivity for combined EBUS + EUS was 87% (CI 84–89%) and the specificity was 99% (CI 98–100%). For EBUS + EUS performed with a single bronchoscope group, the sensitivity improved to 88% (CI 83.1–91.4%) and specificity improved to 100% (CI 99-100%). Conclusion. EBUS + EUS is a highly accurate and safe procedure. The combined procedure should be considered in selected patients with lymphadenopathy noted at stations that are not traditionally accessible with conventional EBUS. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5081694/ /pubmed/27818796 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1024709 Text en Copyright © 2016 Gonzalo Labarca et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Labarca, Gonzalo
Aravena, Carlos
Ortega, Francisco
Arenas, Alex
Majid, Adnan
Folch, Erik
Mehta, Hiren J.
Jantz, Michael A.
Fernandez-Bussy, Sebastian
Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Minimally Invasive Methods for Staging in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort minimally invasive methods for staging in lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5081694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27818796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1024709
work_keys_str_mv AT labarcagonzalo minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT aravenacarlos minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ortegafrancisco minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT arenasalex minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT majidadnan minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT folcherik minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mehtahirenj minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jantzmichaela minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fernandezbussysebastian minimallyinvasivemethodsforstaginginlungcancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysis