Study subjects
This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at a single centre. The study included patients with suspected malignant peripheral lung lesions who underwent bronchoscopy at St. Luke’s International Hospital between October 2013 and March 2020.
Patients who had undergone multiple bronchoscopies were excluded from the study, as were patients who received a diagnosis other than primary lung cancer.
Bronchoscopy and sedation
At St. Luke’s International Hospital, CT was performed at a thickness of 1.0 or 1.25 mm, and a VBN image was created on the basis of the CT data using LungPoint (Broncus Medical, Mountain View, CA, USA) [6]. All bronchoscopy procedures were performed using VBN by LungPoint and EBUS-GS. Radial EBUS was performed in all patients using an endoscopic ultrasound system (EU-ME1; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) equipped with 20-MHz mechanical radial-type probes with a diameter of 1.4 mm (UM-S20-17S; Olympus) or 1.7 mm (UMS20-20R; Olympus). A thin bronchoscope (channel diameter, 2.0 mm; BF-P290 or BF-P260; Olympus) and GS (external diameter, 1.95 mm; K-201; Olympus) were used for the 1.4-mm probe, whereas a larger bronchoscope (channel diameter, 2.9 mm; BF-1T290 or BF-1T260; Olympus) and GS (external diameter, 2.55 mm; K-203; Olympus) were used for the 1.7-mm probe. The appropriate probes and bronchoscopes were selected by the operator (a respiratory specialist).
After brushing cytology and transbronchial aspiration cytology (TBAC) of the peripheral lesion, one cytological specimen was evaluated by rapid onsite cytology. After collection of the cytology specimen, biopsies were taken with forceps under fluoroscopic guidance for histopathological examination. Biopsies were repeated until specimens of adequate number and size were collected. The procedures followed those of Kitamura et al. [7].
All procedures were performed under local anaesthesia and sedation with intravenous midazolam and pethidine.
Study design
At a different time to the actual bronchoscopy procedures, we compared associations of the distance by VBN, determined using SYNAPSE VINCENT, with the diagnosis rate of primary lung cancer and clinical factors. In addition, one observer (A.K.; respiratory specialist) reviewed the CT images and assessed the presence of the CT bronchus sign based on the location of the nearest branch and lesion [2]. Clinical factors included age, sex, lesion diameter, lesion structure, presence of the CT bronchus sign, EBUS-GS image (within, adjacent to, invisible) and pathological diagnosis. Lesion structure was classified as ground-glass nodule (GGN) or solid. GGN lesions included part-solid GGN and pure GGN lesions, whereas solid lesions included cavities, consolidation and nodules.
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of St. Luke’s International Hospital (18-R177) on 27 February 2019.
Follow-up and statistical analysis
For peripheral lesions that could not be diagnosed by bronchoscopy, pathological specimens were obtained (to the extent possible) using other methods, such as surgery or percutaneous needle biopsy. If a peripheral lesion could not be diagnosed by bronchoscopy and a mediastinal lymph node was accessible, we tried to establish a pathological diagnosis by EBUS-guided transbronchial needle aspiration from the bronchial lumen or endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle aspiration to the mediastinal lymph node from the oesophageal lumen. Patients who had no pathology diagnosis and refused to undergo further biopsy were diagnosed after at least 2 years of follow-up by both a radiologist and respiratory specialist. When the diameter of the lesion increased or the solid compartment of the GGN increased on CT, primary lung cancer was diagnosed without pathology.
Univariate analyses were performed using the Chi-squared test and Mann–Whitney U test, whereas multivariate analyses were conducted using logistic regression analysis. Two-sided P < 0.05 was regarded as statistically significant. All statistical analyses were conducted using R version 3.6.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria), which was also used to draw the prediction graph. The statistical model was established using 80% of all patients (randomly selected). The statistical model comprised the results of bronchoscopy as an outcome variable, and the distance by VBN, lesion size and lesion structure as explanatory variables. The prediction graph was created based on this statistical model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the prediction graph was evaluated in the remaining 20% of patients.