Interventional Bronchoscopy in King Hussain Medical Center (KHMC), Jordan : Methods Evaluation and Comparison

Raja Alkhasawneh, Laith Obidat, A. Abdelkarem
{"title":"Interventional Bronchoscopy in King Hussain Medical Center (KHMC), Jordan : Methods Evaluation and Comparison","authors":"Raja Alkhasawneh, Laith Obidat, A. Abdelkarem","doi":"10.5742/MEIM.2018.93396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: In this study our aim is to compare sample adequacy obtained using two of the least invasive techniques; blind-TBNA and EBUS-TBNA that are routinely used for obtaining tissue samples for diagnosing mediastinal and hilar masses at King Hussain Medical Center (KHMC). Method: 73 patients underwent diagnostic interventional bronchoscopy for mediastinal and hilar mass in the period between January 2015 and March 2017; the p value was calculated using the two-sample proportion test to identify difference in the Population Proportions. Results and Conclusion: EBUS-TBNA technique is shown to have a higher diagnostic yield (79%) compared to blind-TBNA technique (65%) although statically P value shows no significant difference between the two techniques. Still EBUS-TBNA has an advantage over the blind-TBNA especially for small and deep station lymph node or masses because its real-time visualization during sampling, helps to avoid any vascular injuries, and also decreases the need for another attempt of sampling. Despite our short experience in this field, we have excellent results; both methods of interventional bronchoscopy techniques that are carried at KHMC are efficient and effective. Accordingly, we recommend using both interventional bronchoscopy techniques as standard procedure, where it will help to minimize the number of open surgeries, complications and longtime hospital staying.","PeriodicalId":243742,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Journal of Internal Medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Journal of Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5742/MEIM.2018.93396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: In this study our aim is to compare sample adequacy obtained using two of the least invasive techniques; blind-TBNA and EBUS-TBNA that are routinely used for obtaining tissue samples for diagnosing mediastinal and hilar masses at King Hussain Medical Center (KHMC). Method: 73 patients underwent diagnostic interventional bronchoscopy for mediastinal and hilar mass in the period between January 2015 and March 2017; the p value was calculated using the two-sample proportion test to identify difference in the Population Proportions. Results and Conclusion: EBUS-TBNA technique is shown to have a higher diagnostic yield (79%) compared to blind-TBNA technique (65%) although statically P value shows no significant difference between the two techniques. Still EBUS-TBNA has an advantage over the blind-TBNA especially for small and deep station lymph node or masses because its real-time visualization during sampling, helps to avoid any vascular injuries, and also decreases the need for another attempt of sampling. Despite our short experience in this field, we have excellent results; both methods of interventional bronchoscopy techniques that are carried at KHMC are efficient and effective. Accordingly, we recommend using both interventional bronchoscopy techniques as standard procedure, where it will help to minimize the number of open surgeries, complications and longtime hospital staying.
约旦侯赛因国王医疗中心(KHMC)介入支气管镜检查:方法、评价和比较
目的:在本研究中,我们的目的是比较使用两种最小侵入性技术获得的样本充分性;盲tbna和EBUS-TBNA是侯赛因国王医疗中心(KHMC)常规用于获取组织样本以诊断纵隔和肺门肿块的方法。方法:2015年1月至2017年3月行诊断性介入支气管镜检查纵隔及肺门肿块73例;使用双样本比例检验计算p值,以确定总体比例的差异。结果与结论:EBUS-TBNA技术的诊断率(79%)高于blind-TBNA技术(65%),但两种技术的P值无统计学差异。尽管如此,EBUS-TBNA比blind-TBNA有优势,特别是对于小而深的淋巴结或肿块,因为它在采样过程中的实时可视化,有助于避免任何血管损伤,也减少了再次采样的需要。尽管我们在这一领域的经验很短,但我们取得了优异的成绩;两种介入支气管镜技术都是高效和有效的。因此,我们建议将这两种介入支气管镜检查技术作为标准手术,这将有助于减少开放手术、并发症和长期住院的次数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信