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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |