• Monaldi Arch Chest Dis · Feb 1997

    Comparative Study

    Comparison of endobronchial needle aspiration with forceps and brush biopsies in the diagnosis of endobronchial lung cancer.

    • S Bilaçeroğlu, O Günel, U Cağirici, and K Perim.
    • Dept of Thoracic Medicine, Izmir Training Hospital for Thoracic Medicine and Surgery, Turkey.
    • Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 1997 Feb 1;52(1):13-7.

    AbstractEndobronchial forceps biopsy (FB) specimens of lung carcinoma are not uncommonly interpreted as nondiagnostic owing to extensive crush artefact, necrosis, or insufficient tissue. FB cannot be performed in some endobronchial lung cancers (EBLCs) with massive bleeding tendency due to fragility and friability. Cytological studies from the brushings and washings may also be unproductive, increasing the bronchoscopist's frustration. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield and complications of endobronchial needle aspiration (EBNA) with those of FB and brush biopsy (BB) in EBLCs examined by fibreoptic bronchoscopy. A prospective sequential study was carried out on 151 in-patients with EBLC. Bronchial aspiration (BA), EBNA and BB were performed in the patients with respiratory distress and with accompanying tumours of high bleeding tendency, completely obstructing main bronchi (Group 1: 68 patients). BA, EBNA and FB were performed in those with either central or peripheral EBLCs but without respiratory distress and/or significant bleeding tendency (Group 2: 83 patients). In Group 1, the diagnostic yield of EBNA was found to be 90%, whereas that of BB was 66% (p < 0.05). In the same group, EBNA provided cell types in 95%, compared with 88% by BB (p > 0.05). EBNA was diagnostic in 92% of Group 2 patients, while FB established diagnosis in 78% of patients (p > 0.05). In determining cell type, no significant difference was found between EBNA (95%) and FB (97%) (p > 0.05). Regarding complications (only bleeding), there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between EBNA (7%) and BB (13%), or between EBNA (4%) and FB (17%). We conclude that in endobronchial lung cancers: 1) the diagnostic yield of endobronchial needle aspiration is higher than brush biopsy; 2) endobronchial needle aspiration increases the yield of brush biopsy when forceps biopsy cannot be performed owing to significant bleeding; 3) endobronchial needle aspiration increases the diagnostic yield when a forceps biopsy specimen is inadequate because of crush artefact, necrosis, or tissue resistance; and 4) endobronchial needle aspiration is as safe as brush biopsy and forceps biopsy.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…