Publications

INTRODUCTION

The sensitivity of suspicious lung nodules biopsied by currently available techniques is suboptimal. Robotic-assisted navigation bronchoscopy (RANB) is a novel method for biopsying lung nodules. Our study objective was to determine the sensitivity for malignancy and overall diagnostic accuracy for RANB when combined with cone beam CT (CBCT) for secondary confirmation.

METHODS

52 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled. Demographic data, nodule characteristics, procedural information, and follow-up results were obtained.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 66, with the majority Caucasian (73%) females (65%) with a similar number of never (46%) and former (46%) smokers. 15 patients had a history of cancer and 3 had a prior thoracic surgery. 59 total nodules were included as 7 patients had two nodules biopsied. Mean nodule diameter was < 2 cm in all dimension with the majority solid (41, 70%) and located in the upper lobes (left: 22, 37%; right: 17, 29%). Bronchus sign was absent (32, 54%) or present (27, 46%) in a similar number. All nodules were successfully reached with nine (15%) requiring minor directional changes after initial cone beam CT. A tissue diagnosis was obtained in 83% (49/59) of biopsied nodules, with malignancy (31, 65%) most common. Including all biopsy results and follow-up imaging, we obtained an 84% (31/37) procedural sensitivity for malignancy and an overall 86% (51/59) diagnostic yield.

CONCLUSION

RANB with CBCT increases sensitivity for malignancy and diagnostic accuracy of lung nodule biopsies. Combining these modalities has the potential to shift the diagnostic approach to pulmonary nodules.

One of the most feared complications of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is stroke, with increased mortality and disability observed in patients suffering a stroke after TAVI. There has been no significant decline in stroke rates seen over the last 5 years; attention has therefore been given to strategies for cerebral embolic protection. With the emergence of new randomized trial data, we sought to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effect of cerebral embolic protection during TAVI both on clinical outcomes and on neuroimaging parameters. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of cerebral embolic protection during TAVI. The primary end point was the risk of stroke. The risk of stroke was not significantly different with the use of cerebral embolic protection: relative risk (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.36, p = 0.566. Nor was there a significant reduction in the risk of disabling stroke, non-disabling stroke or death. There was no significant difference in total lesion volume on MRI with cerebral embolic protection: mean difference -74.94, 95% CI -174.31 to 24.4, p = 0.139. There was also not a significant difference in the number of new ischemic lesions on MRI: mean difference -2.15, 95% -5.25 to 0.96, p = 0.176, although there was significant heterogeneity for the neuroimaging outcomes. In conclusion, cerebral embolic protection during TAVI is safe but there is no evidence of a statistically significant benefit on clinical outcomes or neuroimaging parameters.