Sensitivity of convex probe endobronchial sonographically guided transbronchial needle aspiration in the diagnosis of granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenitis

Departments of Pulmonary Diseases, Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Journal of ultrasound in medicine: official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.54). 12/2011; 30(12):1683-9.
Source: PubMed


The purpose of this study was to investigate the sensitivity and diagnostic value of convex probe endobronchial sonographically guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) in the diagnosis of granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenitis.
Patients clinically and radiologically suspected to have granulomatous mediastinal disease and followed in our clinic between October 2008 and July 2010 were included. Convex probe EBUS with local anesthesia and under conscious sedation and EBUS-TBNA from hilar and mediastinal lymph nodes were performed after physical examination, chest radiography, computed tomography of the thorax, and routine biochemical analysis. Detection of noncaseating/caseating granulomas was accepted as sufficient for diagnosis of sarcoidosis/tuberculosis in the presence of clinical and radiologic findings. For patients whose EBUS-TBNA results were nondiagnostic, a definitive diagnosis was reached by invasive procedures. The sensitivity of EBUS-TBNA in the diagnosis of granulomatous lymphadenitis and diagnostic accuracy in granulomatous hilar/mediastinal lymphadenopathies was calculated.
Seventy-two patients were included in study (20 male and 52 female; mean age ± SD, 46.22 ± 13.94 years). In 72 cases, 121 lymph node aspirations were performed. The average lymph node short axis was 1.96 cm. With EBUS-TBNA among the 72 cases, 35 were diagnosed as sarcoidosis and 16 as tuberculous lymphadenitis. A definitive diagnosis could not be reached with EBUS-TBNA in 21 cases. As a result, 9 of these EBUS-TBNA-negative cases were diagnosed as reactive lymphadenitis, 9 as sarcoidosis, and 3 as tuberculosis by invasive procedures. The sensitivity values of EBUS-TBNA for diagnosis of sarcoidosis, tuberculosis, and granulomatous diseases were 79.5%, 84.2%, and 80.9%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNA for granulomatous diseases was 83.3%. No major complications occurred.
In the diagnosis of granulomatous lymphadenitis, EBUS-TBNA, with high sensitivity and a minimum complication rate, is an alternative to mediastinoscopy.

1 Read
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: This study assessed the clinical utility of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) for the diagnosis of suspected granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenopathy. Materials and methods: Retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA for suspected granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenopathy at Singapore General Hospital between December 2008 and December 2011 inclusive. Results: Over a period of 3 years, a total of 371 patients underwent EBUS-TBNA of whom 33 (9%) had the procedure performed for evaluation of suspected granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenopathy - 18 for suspected tuberculosis (TB) and non-tuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) lymphadenitis, and 15 for suspected sarcoidosis. EBUS-TBNA was diagnostic in 9 of the 13 patients with a final diagnosis of TB/NTM. EBUS-TBNA cultures were positive in 6 of them (46%), 1 showed acid-fast bacilli (AFB) although cultures were negative, and 2 had necrotising granulomatous inflammation from EBUS-TBNA biopsies and sputum cultures grew TB. EBUS-TBNA was diagnostic in 9 of the 14 patients with a final diagnosis of sarcoidosis through histology showing non-caseating granulomatous inflammation. The sensitivities of EBUS-TBNA for diagnosis of TB/NTM, sarcoidosis and overall granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenopathy were 69%, 64%, 64%; the negative predictive values were 56%, 17%, 33%; and accuracies were 78%, 67%, 70%, respectively. Conclusion: EBUS-TBNA can be useful in the diagnosis of suspected granulomatous mediastinal lymphadenopathy with sensitivities and accuracies of >60%.
    Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore 05/2014; 43(5):250-4. · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the role of endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) in pulmonary sarcoidosis has previously been investigated, the determining factors in diagnosing sarcoidosis by EBUS-TBNA without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) are unclear. Patients with clinically and radiographically suspected sarcoidosis underwent EBUS-TBNA without ROSE in a prospective study. Presence of non-caseating epithelioid cell granulomas was pathologic evidence of sarcoidosis. The EBUS-TBNA was performed in 120 patients, 111 of whom had confirmed sarcoidosis. For the patients with sarcoidosis (62 stage I, 49 stage II) EBUS-TBNA provided sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 93.69%, 100%, 100%, 56.25%, and 94.17%, respectively, in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA for sarcoidosis was associated with disease stage, but not associated with serum angiotensin converting enzyme level, number of lymph node stations sampled per patient, or total number of passes performed per patient. At EBUS-TBNA, 284 mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes were aspirated in 111 patients. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that short-axis diameter and more than 1 needle pass per lymph node were independent risk factors associated with positive pathology. No major procedure-related complications were observed. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration is a safe procedure with high sensitivity for diagnosing sarcoidosis, having a higher diagnostic yield in stage I than stage II. To obtain a higher diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA in pulmonary sarcoidosis without ROSE, operators should select the largest mediastinal or hilar lymph node accessible and puncture with 3 to 5 passes. Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    The Annals of Thoracic Surgery 12/2014; 99(2). DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.09.029 · 3.85 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) has been widely used in the diagnosis of mediastinal lymphadenopathies. Here, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the diagnostic value of EBUS-TBNA in mediastinal tuberculous lymphadenopathy (TBLA). MATERIAL AND METHODS PubMed, EMBASE, and Sinoced were systematically searched for articles published in English or Chinese that reported the diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA in mediastinal TBLA. The quality of studies was assessed using the QualSyst tool. Using 95% confidence intervals (CI), the diagnostic yields of EBUS-TBNA were calculated for the individual studies, and the results were then pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also assessed. RESULTS A total of 14 studies, consisting of 684 patients with mediastinal TBLA, were finally included. The pooled diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA for mediastinal TBLA was 80% (95% CI: 74-86%). Significant heterogeneity (I2=77.9%) and significant publication bias were detected (Begg's test p=0.05 and Egger's test p=0.02). From subgroup analyses, significant differences in the diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA were associated with Asian vs. European (UK) studies, retrospective vs. prospective studies, those employing rapid on-site cytological evaluation vs. not, those employing different anesthetic types, and those employing smear vs. culture. However, microbiological examination and the number of lymph node passes did not have a significant effect on the diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA. Fifteen minor complications for EBUS-TBNA were reported. CONCLUSIONS EBUS-TBNA appears to be an efficacious and safe procedure and should be used as an initial diagnostic tool for mediastinal TBLA.
    Medical science monitor: international medical journal of experimental and clinical research 07/2015; 21:2064-72. DOI:10.12659/MSM.894526 · 1.43 Impact Factor