麻醉方法及快速现场评价对支气管超声引导下经支气管针吸诊断肺癌的影响:回顾性研究。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Journal of thoracic disease Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-12-28 DOI:10.21037/jtd-24-1117
Yu-He Hu, Wen-Hui Xu, Yu-Ying Li
{"title":"麻醉方法及快速现场评价对支气管超声引导下经支气管针吸诊断肺癌的影响:回顾性研究。","authors":"Yu-He Hu, Wen-Hui Xu, Yu-Ying Li","doi":"10.21037/jtd-24-1117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a critical method for diagnosing lung cancer. While EBUS-TBNA is commonly performed under conscious sedation, the potential benefits of conducting the procedure under general anesthesia and incorporating rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) to enhance diagnostic yield remain uncertain. This study aims to investigate the impact of anesthesia methods and ROSE on the diagnostic efficacy of EBUS-TBNA for lung cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study collected data from patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA for suspected lung cancer in the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine at The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University from August 2018 to December 2023. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the anesthesia method used and whether ROSE was performed: the non-general anesthesia group (NGA group), the general anesthesia group (GA group), and the general anesthesia with ROSE group (RGA group). The study analyzed baseline characteristics, puncture details, diagnostic outcomes, and complications across the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of puncture needles used in the RGA group was significantly lower than in the other two groups (P<0.001). Most patients received a definitive diagnosis, with malignant tumor diagnostic rates of 80.95%, 85.71%, and 93.44% in the NGA, GA, and RGA groups, respectively (P=0.12). The overall disease diagnostic rates were 76.06%, 79.22%, and 86.11%, respectively (P=0.30). No severe complications occurred in any of the groups. The proportion of patients willing to undergo repeat EBUS-TBNA was significantly lower in the NGA group compared to the other two groups (P=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to local anesthesia combined with intravenous analgesia and sedation or general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia combined with ROSE reduces the number of puncture needles required during EBUS-TBNA but does not further improve diagnostic efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":17542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of thoracic disease","volume":"16 12","pages":"8493-8502"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740067/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of anesthesia methods and rapid on-site evaluation on the diagnosis of lung cancer using endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: a retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Yu-He Hu, Wen-Hui Xu, Yu-Ying Li\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/jtd-24-1117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a critical method for diagnosing lung cancer. While EBUS-TBNA is commonly performed under conscious sedation, the potential benefits of conducting the procedure under general anesthesia and incorporating rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) to enhance diagnostic yield remain uncertain. This study aims to investigate the impact of anesthesia methods and ROSE on the diagnostic efficacy of EBUS-TBNA for lung cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study collected data from patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA for suspected lung cancer in the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine at The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University from August 2018 to December 2023. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the anesthesia method used and whether ROSE was performed: the non-general anesthesia group (NGA group), the general anesthesia group (GA group), and the general anesthesia with ROSE group (RGA group). The study analyzed baseline characteristics, puncture details, diagnostic outcomes, and complications across the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of puncture needles used in the RGA group was significantly lower than in the other two groups (P<0.001). Most patients received a definitive diagnosis, with malignant tumor diagnostic rates of 80.95%, 85.71%, and 93.44% in the NGA, GA, and RGA groups, respectively (P=0.12). The overall disease diagnostic rates were 76.06%, 79.22%, and 86.11%, respectively (P=0.30). No severe complications occurred in any of the groups. The proportion of patients willing to undergo repeat EBUS-TBNA was significantly lower in the NGA group compared to the other two groups (P=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to local anesthesia combined with intravenous analgesia and sedation or general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia combined with ROSE reduces the number of puncture needles required during EBUS-TBNA but does not further improve diagnostic efficacy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of thoracic disease\",\"volume\":\"16 12\",\"pages\":\"8493-8502\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740067/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of thoracic disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-1117\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of thoracic disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-1117","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:支气管超声引导下经支气管穿刺(EBUS-TBNA)是诊断肺癌的重要方法。虽然EBUS-TBNA通常在清醒镇静下进行,但在全麻下进行手术并结合快速现场评估(ROSE)以提高诊断率的潜在益处仍不确定。本研究旨在探讨麻醉方式和ROSE对EBUS-TBNA对肺癌诊断效果的影响。方法:本研究收集2018年8月至2023年12月西南医科大学附属医院呼吸与重症医学科因疑似肺癌接受EBUS-TBNA治疗的患者数据。根据麻醉方式及是否行ROSE分为非全麻组(NGA组)、全麻组(GA组)、全麻加ROSE组(RGA组)。该研究分析了各组患者的基线特征、穿刺细节、诊断结果和并发症。结果:RGA组穿刺针数明显低于其他两组(p结论:与局麻联合静脉镇痛镇静或单纯全麻相比,全麻联合ROSE可减少EBUS-TBNA穿刺针数,但不能进一步提高诊断疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The impact of anesthesia methods and rapid on-site evaluation on the diagnosis of lung cancer using endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: a retrospective study.

Background: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a critical method for diagnosing lung cancer. While EBUS-TBNA is commonly performed under conscious sedation, the potential benefits of conducting the procedure under general anesthesia and incorporating rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) to enhance diagnostic yield remain uncertain. This study aims to investigate the impact of anesthesia methods and ROSE on the diagnostic efficacy of EBUS-TBNA for lung cancer.

Methods: This study collected data from patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA for suspected lung cancer in the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine at The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University from August 2018 to December 2023. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the anesthesia method used and whether ROSE was performed: the non-general anesthesia group (NGA group), the general anesthesia group (GA group), and the general anesthesia with ROSE group (RGA group). The study analyzed baseline characteristics, puncture details, diagnostic outcomes, and complications across the groups.

Results: The number of puncture needles used in the RGA group was significantly lower than in the other two groups (P<0.001). Most patients received a definitive diagnosis, with malignant tumor diagnostic rates of 80.95%, 85.71%, and 93.44% in the NGA, GA, and RGA groups, respectively (P=0.12). The overall disease diagnostic rates were 76.06%, 79.22%, and 86.11%, respectively (P=0.30). No severe complications occurred in any of the groups. The proportion of patients willing to undergo repeat EBUS-TBNA was significantly lower in the NGA group compared to the other two groups (P=0.002).

Conclusions: Compared to local anesthesia combined with intravenous analgesia and sedation or general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia combined with ROSE reduces the number of puncture needles required during EBUS-TBNA but does not further improve diagnostic 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
Journal of thoracic disease
Journal of thoracic disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
254
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thoracic Disease (JTD, J Thorac Dis, pISSN: 2072-1439; eISSN: 2077-6624) was founded in Dec 2009, and indexed in PubMed in Dec 2011 and Science Citation Index SCI in Feb 2013. It is published quarterly (Dec 2009- Dec 2011), bimonthly (Jan 2012 - Dec 2013), monthly (Jan. 2014-) and openly distributed worldwide. JTD received its impact factor of 2.365 for the year 2016. JTD publishes manuscripts that describe new findings and provide current, practical information on the diagnosis and treatment of conditions related to thoracic disease. All the submission and reviewing are conducted electronically so that rapid review is assured.
×
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