Clinical Profile and Positivity Rate of Fiber Optic Bronchoscopy (FOB) Procedures in Lung Cancer
Main Article Content
Abstract
Fiber Optic Bronchoscopy (FOB) is an invasive procedure that has been traditionally used both as diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in the field of pulmonary diseases. However, it is mainly used as diagnostic method in lung cancer diagnosis, followed by appropriate sampling procedures including needle aspiration, forceps biopsy, brushing, and washing. We aim to characterize the profile of FOB results including the positivity rate (the rate in which pathology results yield either class IV or class V cells) of each FOB procedure. This is an observational descriptive study using retrospective approach using existing FOB results from our patients. The most common FOB finding was compressive stenosis (35.4%), followed by obstructive (34.8%), and infiltrative stenosis (29.8%). Positivity rate for needle aspiration was 50% for infiltrative and 57.15% for obstructive stenosis; Positivity rate for forceps biopsy was 42.1% for infiltrative and 73.33% for obstructive stenosis; Positivity rate for brushing was 6.66% for compressive, 38.24% for infiltrative, and 25.72% for obstructive stenosis; and positivity rate of washing was 5.36% for compressive, 17.54% for infiltrative, and 6.12% for obstructive stenosis. These results showed that as the main method in lung cancer diagnosis, FOB procedures have excellent results depending on the choice of sampling procedures used based on FOB findings.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. Biswas A, Mehta HJ, Sriram PS. Diagnostic yield of the virtual bronchoscopy navigation system guided sampling of peripheral lung lesions using ultrathin bronchoscope and protected bronchial brush. Turk Thorac J. 2019 Jan 1;20(1):6–11.
II. Muthu V, Sehgal IS, Prasad KT, Agarwal R. Iatrogenic pneumothorax following vigorous suctioning of mucus plug during flexible bronchoscopy. BMJ Case Rep. 2019 Oct 1;12(10).
III. Choo R, Naser NSH, Nadkarni NV, Anantham D. Utility of bronchoalveolar lavage in the management of immunocompromised patients presenting with lung infiltrates. BMC Pulm Med. 2019 Feb 26;19(1).
IV. Devkota KC, Pathak R, Khanal A, Chokhani R, Pathak R. Fiber-optic bronchoscopy: seven-year experience at Nepal Medical College Teaching Hospital.
V. Barta JA, Powell CA, Wisnivesky JP. Global epidemiology of lung cancer. Vol. 85, Annals of Global Health. Ubiquity Press; 2019.
VI. Griff S, Schonfeld N, Ammenwerth W, Blum TG, Grah C, Bauer TT, et al. Diagnostic yield of transbronchial cryobiopsy in non-neoplastic lung disease: A retrospective case series. BMC Pulm Med. 2014 Nov 3;14(1).
VII. Ost DE, Ernst A, Lei X, Kovitz KL, Benzaquen S, Diaz-Mendoza J, et al. Diagnostic yield and complications of bronchoscopy for peripheral lung lesions: Results of the AQuIRE registry. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016 Jan 1;193(1):68–77.
VIII. Eapen GA, Shah AM, Lei X, Jimenez CA, Morice RC, Yarmus L, et al. Complications, consequences, and practice patterns of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: Results of the AQuIRE Registry. Chest. 2013;143(4):1044–53.
IX. Soler Cataluña JJ, Perpiñá M, Greses J V., Calvo V, Padilla JD, París F. Cell type accuracy of bronchial biopsy specimens in primary lung cancer. Chest. 1996;109(5):1199–203.
X. Freitag L, Ernst A, Unger M, Kovitz K, Marquette CH. A proposed classification system of central airway stenosis. European Respiratory Journal. 2007 Jul;30(1):7–12.
XI. Thomas L, Doyle LA, Edelman MJ. Lung cancer in women: Emerging differences in epidemiology, biology, and therapy. Vol. 128, Chest. American College of Chest Physicians; 2005. p. 370–81.
XII. Wakelee HA, Chang ET, Gomez SL, Keegan TH, Feskanich D, Clarke CA, et al. Lung cancer incidence in never smokers. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2007 Feb 10;25(5):472–8.
XIII. Sone S, Li F, Yang ZG, Honda T, Maruyama Y, Takashima S, et al. Results of three-year mass screening programme for lung cancer using mobile low-dose spiral computed tomography scanner. Br J Cancer. 2001;84(1):25–32.
XIV. Skarin AT, Herbst RS, Leong TL, Bailey A, Sugarbaker D, Skarin AT. Lung cancer in patients under age 40 [Internet]. Vol. 32, Lung Cancer. 2001. Available from: www.elsevier.nl/locate/lungcan
XV. Daneshvar C, Falconer WE, Ahmed M, Sibly A, Hindle M, Nicholson TW, et al. Prevalence and outcome of central airway obstruction in patients with lung cancer. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2019 Sep 1;6(1).
XVI. Doǧan C, Fidan A, Parmaksiz E, Cömert S, Salepçi B, Çaǧlayan B. Can positron emission tomography/computed tomography be predictive of diagnostic success in endobronchial biopsies performed through a fiber-optic bronchoscopy in lung cancer? Ann Thorac Med. 2018 Jul 1;13(3):182–9.
XVII. Greses J V., Soler JJ, Perpiñá M, Sanchís J, Vera F. Factores relacionados con la rentabilidad diagnóstica de la biopsia bronquial en el carcinoma broncogénico primario. Arch Bronconeumol. 1997;33(11):556–60.
XVIII. C J, V. V. K. A Comparative Study of Bronchial Washing and Brushing, with Bronchial Biopsy. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2020 Feb 3;9(05):284–8.
XIX. Chen CC, Bai CH, Lee KY, Chou YT, Pan ST, Wang YH. Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of bronchial brushing cytology in lung cancer: A meta-analysis. Cancer Cytopathol. 2021 Sep 1;129(9):739–49.