评价快速现场评价(ROSE)联合支气管内超声(EBUS)对肺部病变的诊断价值。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
International Journal of General Medicine Pub Date : 2025-04-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IJGM.S513395
Shan Xu, Qianlong Yin, Jisong Zhang, Xiaoling Xu, Enguo Chen, Kejing Ying
{"title":"评价快速现场评价(ROSE)联合支气管内超声(EBUS)对肺部病变的诊断价值。","authors":"Shan Xu, Qianlong Yin, Jisong Zhang, Xiaoling Xu, Enguo Chen, Kejing Ying","doi":"10.2147/IJGM.S513395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) are extensively utilized in the clinical practice of respiratory medicine. The combined diagnostic approach has been shown to enhance the clinical diagnostic accuracy; however, certain controversies remain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 200 patients who underwent endobronchial ultrasound combined with transbronchial lung biopsy with a guide sheath (EBUS-GS-TBLB) or endobronchial ultrasound combined with transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) and received histopathological diagnoses at the Bronchoscopy Department, from January 2021 to January 2022. Of these, 168 patients were assigned to the ROSE group and 32 to the non-ROSE group. The diagnosis rates of EBUS-GS-TBLB and EBUS-TBNA, both with and without ROSE, along with the secondary biopsy rate, complication probability, and mean number of biopsies, were compared to analyze the differences between tumors and non-tumors. The safety of EBUS-GS-TBLB and EBUS-TBNA was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall diagnostic accuracy was 85.71% in the ROSE group and 65.62% in the non-ROSE group. The diagnostic accuracy of the ROSE group was significantly higher than that of the non-ROSE group (P < 0.05). Compared to the non-ROSE group, the rate of secondary biopsy in the ROSE group was significantly reduced (P < 0.05), particularly in non-tumor cases. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications and the average number of biopsies between the two groups (P > 0.05). Compared to the EBUS-GS-TBLB group, the EBUS-TBNA group showed a significantly lower incidence of complications and fewer biopsies (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The integration of ROSE with EBUS enhanced the diagnostic rate and reduced the need for secondary examinations in the biopsy diagnosis of lung lesions, particularly in the definitive diagnosis of non-neoplastic lesions. The combination of ROSE technology appears to be more advantageous. Compared to EBUS-GS-TBLB, EBUS-TBNA demonstrated a lower incidence of complications and fewer biopsies.</p>","PeriodicalId":14131,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of General Medicine","volume":"18 ","pages":"2237-2245"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036591/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To Evaluate the Diagnostic Performance of Rapid on-Site Evaluation (ROSE) in Combination with Endobronchial Ultrasound (EBUS) for Pulmonary Lesions.\",\"authors\":\"Shan Xu, Qianlong Yin, Jisong Zhang, Xiaoling Xu, Enguo Chen, Kejing Ying\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/IJGM.S513395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) are extensively utilized in the clinical practice of respiratory medicine. The combined diagnostic approach has been shown to enhance the clinical diagnostic accuracy; however, certain controversies remain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 200 patients who underwent endobronchial ultrasound combined with transbronchial lung biopsy with a guide sheath (EBUS-GS-TBLB) or endobronchial ultrasound combined with transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) and received histopathological diagnoses at the Bronchoscopy Department, from January 2021 to January 2022. Of these, 168 patients were assigned to the ROSE group and 32 to the non-ROSE group. The diagnosis rates of EBUS-GS-TBLB and EBUS-TBNA, both with and without ROSE, along with the secondary biopsy rate, complication probability, and mean number of biopsies, were compared to analyze the differences between tumors and non-tumors. The safety of EBUS-GS-TBLB and EBUS-TBNA was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall diagnostic accuracy was 85.71% in the ROSE group and 65.62% in the non-ROSE group. The diagnostic accuracy of the ROSE group was significantly higher than that of the non-ROSE group (P < 0.05). Compared to the non-ROSE group, the rate of secondary biopsy in the ROSE group was significantly reduced (P < 0.05), particularly in non-tumor cases. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications and the average number of biopsies between the two groups (P > 0.05). Compared to the EBUS-GS-TBLB group, the EBUS-TBNA group showed a significantly lower incidence of complications and fewer biopsies (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The integration of ROSE with EBUS enhanced the diagnostic rate and reduced the need for secondary examinations in the biopsy diagnosis of lung lesions, particularly in the definitive diagnosis of non-neoplastic lesions. The combination of ROSE technology appears to be more advantageous. Compared to EBUS-GS-TBLB, EBUS-TBNA demonstrated a lower incidence of complications and fewer biopsies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of General Medicine\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"2237-2245\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036591/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of General Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S513395\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of General Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S513395","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前,支气管超声(EBUS)和快速现场评估(ROSE)在呼吸医学的临床实践中得到了广泛的应用。联合诊断方法已被证明可以提高临床诊断的准确性;然而,某些争议仍然存在。方法:本研究纳入了200例于2021年1月至2022年1月在支气管镜科接受支气管超声联合引导鞘经支气管肺活检(EBUS-GS-TBLB)或支气管超声联合经支气管针吸(EBUS-TBNA)并接受组织病理学诊断的患者。其中,168名患者被分配到ROSE组,32名患者被分配到非ROSE组。比较有无ROSE的EBUS-GS-TBLB和EBUS-TBNA的诊断率,以及二次活检率、并发症概率和平均活检次数,分析肿瘤与非肿瘤的差异。并对EBUS-GS-TBLB和EBUS-TBNA的安全性进行了评价。结果:ROSE组和非ROSE组的总体诊断准确率分别为85.71%和65.62%。ROSE组的诊断准确率显著高于非ROSE组(P < 0.05)。与非ROSE组相比,ROSE组的二次活检率显著降低(P < 0.05),特别是在非肿瘤病例中。两组患者并发症发生率及平均活检次数比较,差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。与EBUS-GS-TBLB组相比,EBUS-TBNA组并发症发生率明显降低,活检次数明显减少(P < 0.05)。结论:ROSE与EBUS的结合提高了肺部病变活检诊断的诊断率,减少了二次检查的需要,特别是对非肿瘤性病变的明确诊断。ROSE技术的结合似乎更有优势。与EBUS-GS-TBLB相比,EBUS-TBNA表现出更低的并发症发生率和更少的活检。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
To Evaluate the Diagnostic Performance of Rapid on-Site Evaluation (ROSE) in Combination with Endobronchial Ultrasound (EBUS) for Pulmonary Lesions.

Background: Currently, Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) are extensively utilized in the clinical practice of respiratory medicine. The combined diagnostic approach has been shown to enhance the clinical diagnostic accuracy; however, certain controversies remain.

Methods: This study included 200 patients who underwent endobronchial ultrasound combined with transbronchial lung biopsy with a guide sheath (EBUS-GS-TBLB) or endobronchial ultrasound combined with transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) and received histopathological diagnoses at the Bronchoscopy Department, from January 2021 to January 2022. Of these, 168 patients were assigned to the ROSE group and 32 to the non-ROSE group. The diagnosis rates of EBUS-GS-TBLB and EBUS-TBNA, both with and without ROSE, along with the secondary biopsy rate, complication probability, and mean number of biopsies, were compared to analyze the differences between tumors and non-tumors. The safety of EBUS-GS-TBLB and EBUS-TBNA was also evaluated.

Results: The overall diagnostic accuracy was 85.71% in the ROSE group and 65.62% in the non-ROSE group. The diagnostic accuracy of the ROSE group was significantly higher than that of the non-ROSE group (P < 0.05). Compared to the non-ROSE group, the rate of secondary biopsy in the ROSE group was significantly reduced (P < 0.05), particularly in non-tumor cases. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications and the average number of biopsies between the two groups (P > 0.05). Compared to the EBUS-GS-TBLB group, the EBUS-TBNA group showed a significantly lower incidence of complications and fewer biopsies (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The integration of ROSE with EBUS enhanced the diagnostic rate and reduced the need for secondary examinations in the biopsy diagnosis of lung lesions, particularly in the definitive diagnosis of non-neoplastic lesions. The combination of ROSE technology appears to be more advantageous. Compared to EBUS-GS-TBLB, EBUS-TBNA demonstrated a lower incidence of complications and fewer biopsies.

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
International Journal of General Medicine
International Journal of General Medicine Medicine-General Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1113
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of General Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on general and internal medicine, pathogenesis, epidemiology, diagnosis, monitoring and treatment protocols. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original research and clinical studies across all disease areas. A key focus of the journal is the elucidation of disease processes and management protocols resulting in improved outcomes for the patient. Patient perspectives such as satisfaction, quality of life, health literacy and communication and their role in developing new healthcare programs and optimizing clinical outcomes are major areas of interest for the journal. As of 1st April 2019, the International Journal of General Medicine will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
×
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