Flexible CO2 Laser in Therapeutic Bronchoscopy: Initial Experiences in a Tertiary Center.

BACKGROUND: CO2 Laser (CO2L) technology deployable through flexible endoscopes now allows for their use throughout the airway, although published data are limited. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of CO2L bronchoscopic procedures, excluding glottic and subglottic interventions. Procedural success was defined as >50% visual reduction in airway obstruction in the area treated or resolution of the procedural indication. RESULTS: Seventy-two procedures were performed on 36 patients. Nonmalignant indications comprised 66%: stent-associated granulation tissue (28%), granulomatosis with polyangiitis lesions (23%), and lung transplant-related granulation tissue (16%) were the most common. Bronchoscopic access was flexible only in 81% and primarily rigid (combined with flexible) in 18%. The site of intervention was the trachea at 19%, the mainstem at 56%, and lobar/segmental airways at 45%. Procedural success was 89%. CO2L was used exclusively in 19%; in 81%, additional techniques were required, most commonly balloon dilation (59%), cryo-debulking (23%), and rigid dilation (16%). Malignant indications had a nonsignificant trend toward requiring adjuvant techniques ( P =0.05). Seventy-six percent of the patients required more than 1 procedure. CO2L exclusive cases had no statistically different needs for subsequent therapeutic bronchoscopies ( P =0.10) or time to reintervention (109 vs. 41 days, P =0.07), and reintervention-free survival was similar ( P =0.10) and difficult to predict. The complication rate attributable to CO2L was 2.7%. CONCLUSION: CO2L is a safe and useful tool when precise cutting and vaporization are desired. Its use in multi-modality approaches has high levels of success in adequately selected lesions, adding an ablative potential to dilation techniques. Vasculitis-associated scars/webs and granulation tissue (including stent-associated) appear to be ideal targets.

Real-World Impact of Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy on the Staging and Diagnosis of Lung Cancer: The Shape of Current and Potential Opportunities.

The approach to peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPL) has been evolving continuously. Advanced bronchoscopic navigational techniques have improved the airway-based approaches to these lesions. Robotic Assisted Bronchoscopy (RAB) can be considered the current pinnacle of this evolution; allowing for a safer approach to sampling lesions previously considered outside of bronchoscopic reach. We present a comprehensive review of the changing epidemiology of lung cancer and the importance of early tissue sampling, the evolution of sampling and navigational bronchoscopic techniques, technical considerations and evidence pertaining to the use of RAB, and adjunct techniques in the diagnosis of lung cancer. Complications and future applications of RAB are also discussed.

Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across healthcare specialties. This is due to several factors including its portability, immediacy of results to guide clinical decision-making, and lack of radiation exposure to patients. The recent growth of handheld ultrasound devices has improved access to ultrasound for many clinicians. Few studies have directly compared different handheld ultrasound devices among themselves or to cart-based ultrasound machines. We conducted a prospective observational study comparing four common handheld ultrasound devices for ease of use, image quality, and overall satisfaction. Twenty-four POCUS experts utilized four handheld devices (Butterfly iQ+™ by Butterfly Network Inc., Kosmos™ by EchoNous, Vscan Air™ by General Electric, and Lumify™ by Philips Healthcare) to obtain three ultrasound views on the same standardized patients using high- and low-frequency probes. RESULTS: Data were collected from 24 POCUS experts using all 4 handheld devices. No single ultrasound device was superior in all categories. For overall ease of use, the Vscan Air™ was rated highest, followed by the Lumify™. For overall image quality, Lumify™ was rated highest, followed by Kosmos™. The Lumify™ device was rated highest for overall satisfaction, while the Vscan Air™ was rated as the most likely to be purchased personally and carried in one's coat pocket. The top 5 characteristics of handheld ultrasound devices rated as being "very important" were image quality, ease of use, portability, total costs, and availability of different probes. CONCLUSIONS: In a comparison of four common handheld ultrasound devices in the United States, no single handheld ultrasound device was perceived to have all desired characteristics. POCUS experts rated the Lumify™ highest for image quality and Vscan Air™ highest for ease of use. Overall satisfaction was highest with the Lumify™ device, while the most likely to be purchased as a pocket device was the Vscan Air™. Image quality was felt to be the most important characteristic in evaluating handheld ultrasound devices.