支气管镜肺容积缩小术治疗慢性阻塞性肺病的有效性和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

Expert review of respiratory medicine Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1080/17476348.2024.2388293
Ranran Zhang, Ziwen Zheng, Yiding Bian, Mingming Deng, Felix F J Herth, Gang Hou
{"title":"支气管镜肺容积缩小术治疗慢性阻塞性肺病的有效性和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Ranran Zhang, Ziwen Zheng, Yiding Bian, Mingming Deng, Felix F J Herth, Gang Hou","doi":"10.1080/17476348.2024.2388293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Various bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) methods have been developed to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy and safety of these interventions remain unclear. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of various BLVR interventions in COPD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed and Embase were searched from inception to 21 October 2023. The primary outcomes assessed included the 6-min walking distance (6MWD), St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, lung function, and adverse events (AE). A frequentist approach with a random-effects model was used for a network meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1646 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Patients treated with an endobronchial valve (EBV) achieved a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in 6MWD and SGRQ at 6 months. Patients treated with coils achieved MCID in the SGRQ score at 12 months. Patients with aspiration valve system and bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation (BTVA) achieved MCID in the SGRQ score at 6 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In COPD patients, EBV should be considered first, while being wary of pneumothorax. Coil and BTVA are potential therapeutic alternatives. Although BTVA demonstrates a safer procedural profile than coils, additional studies are imperative to clarify its efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":94007,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ranran Zhang, Ziwen Zheng, Yiding Bian, Mingming Deng, Felix F J Herth, Gang Hou\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17476348.2024.2388293\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Various bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) methods have been developed to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy and safety of these interventions remain unclear. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of various BLVR interventions in COPD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed and Embase were searched from inception to 21 October 2023. The primary outcomes assessed included the 6-min walking distance (6MWD), St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, lung function, and adverse events (AE). A frequentist approach with a random-effects model was used for a network meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1646 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Patients treated with an endobronchial valve (EBV) achieved a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in 6MWD and SGRQ at 6 months. Patients treated with coils achieved MCID in the SGRQ score at 12 months. Patients with aspiration valve system and bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation (BTVA) achieved MCID in the SGRQ score at 6 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In COPD patients, EBV should be considered first, while being wary of pneumothorax. Coil and BTVA are potential therapeutic alternatives. Although BTVA demonstrates a safer procedural profile than coils, additional studies are imperative to clarify its efficacy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert review of respiratory medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert review of respiratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2024.2388293\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2024.2388293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前已开发出各种支气管镜肺容积缩小(BLVR)方法来治疗慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)。这些干预措施的疗效和安全性仍不明确。本研究评估了各种支气管镜肺容积缩小疗法对慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者的疗效和安全性:方法:检索了从开始到 2023 年 10 月 21 日的 PubMed 和 Embase。评估的主要结果包括6分钟步行距离(6MWD)、圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)评分、肺功能和不良事件(AE)。网络荟萃分析采用随机效应模型的频数主义方法:本次荟萃分析共纳入了 12 项随机对照试验 (RCT),共 1646 名患者。接受支气管内瓣膜(EBV)治疗的患者在6个月后的6MWD和SGRQ达到了最小临床重要差异(MCID)。接受线圈治疗的患者在 12 个月时的 SGRQ 评分达到了最小临床意义差异 (MCID)。使用吸气阀系统和支气管镜热蒸汽消融术(BTVA)的患者在6个月时的SGRQ评分达到了MCID:结论:对于慢性阻塞性肺病患者,在警惕气胸的同时,应首先考虑 EBV。线圈和 BTVA 是潜在的替代治疗方法。虽然 BTVA 比线圈更安全,但仍需进一步研究以明确其疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and safety of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: Various bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) methods have been developed to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy and safety of these interventions remain unclear. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of various BLVR interventions in COPD patients.

Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched from inception to 21 October 2023. The primary outcomes assessed included the 6-min walking distance (6MWD), St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, lung function, and adverse events (AE). A frequentist approach with a random-effects model was used for a network meta-analysis.

Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1646 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Patients treated with an endobronchial valve (EBV) achieved a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in 6MWD and SGRQ at 6 months. Patients treated with coils achieved MCID in the SGRQ score at 12 months. Patients with aspiration valve system and bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation (BTVA) achieved MCID in the SGRQ score at 6 months.

Conclusions: In COPD patients, EBV should be considered first, while being wary of pneumothorax. Coil and BTVA are potential therapeutic alternatives. Although BTVA demonstrates a safer procedural profile than coils, additional studies are imperative to clarify its efficacy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信