RESUMEN
Background: In lung cancer, molecular testing and next-generation sequencing (NGS) are needed to identify therapeutic targets and are increasingly being used in earlier stages of the disease. Despite its longstanding use, it remains unclear whether transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) of peripheral lung lesions provides as adequate material for genetic testing as transbronchial forceps biopsies (TBFBs). In this study, we aim to analyze the use of TBNA using median viable cell area (MVCA) as a surrogate parameter to analyze sample quality. Methods: This prospective single-center study analyzed biopsy specimens or aspirates of patients who underwent bronchoscopy with transbronchial biopsy. Patients underwent bronchoscopy with TBFB and TBNA for suspected lung cancer in peripheral lung lesions. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either TBFB or TBNA as the first biopsy technique and then switched to the other. After routine workup, sample slides were digitally scanned, and MVCA was calculated by a pathologist blinded to the biopsy technique used. The primary endpoint was MVCA of TBNA versus TBFB. Secondary endpoints were complications categorized as bleeding, pneumothorax, and other. Results: Between August 2021 and April 2022, 15 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis. Six patients were included in cohort 1 and nine patients in cohort 2. A malignant diagnosis was confirmed in 11/15 (73.3%) cases, of which nine were primary lung malignancies. Overall, MVCA in samples obtained by TBFB was significantly larger than TBNA samples {TBFB-MVCA 9.80 mm2 [interquartile range (IQR), 2.70-10.39 mm2] vs. TBNA-MVCA 2.70 mm2 (IQR, 0.14-8.21 mm2), P=0.008}. Despite this difference, molecular testing was feasible in both TBNA and TBFB samples. No major complications were observed. Conclusions: Despite a significantly smaller MVCA provided by TBNA, samples were still considered feasible for NGS, indicating that TBNA represents an alternative method to obtain sufficient tumor tissue in peripheral nodules as part of the diagnosis of suspected lung cancer.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: In this retrospective case series, survival rates in different indications for veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and differential diagnoses of COVID-19 associated refractory circulatory failure are investigated. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 28 consecutive COVID-19 patients requiring VA-ECMO. All VA-ECMO's were cannulated peripherally, using a femoro-femoral cannulation. RESULTS: At VA-ECMO initiation, median age was 57 years (IQR: 51-62), SOFA score 16 (IQR: 13-17) and norepinephrine dosing 0.53µg/kg/min (IQR: 0.35-0.87). Virus-variants were: 61% wild-type, 14% Alpha, 18% Delta and 7% Omicron. Indications for VA-ECMO support were pulmonary embolism (PE) (n = 5, survival 80%), right heart failure due to secondary pulmonary hypertension (n = 5, survival 20%), cardiac arrest (n = 4, survival 25%), acute heart failure (AHF) (n = 10, survival 40%) and refractory vasoplegia (n = 4, survival 0%). Among the patients with AHF, 4 patients suffered from COVID-19 associated heart failure (CovHF) (survival 100%) and 6 patients from sepsis associated heart failure (SHF) (survival 0%). Main Complications were acute kidney injury (AKI) 93%, renal replacement therapy was needed in 79%, intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 18%. Overall survival to hospital discharge was 39%. CONCLUSION: Survival on VA-ECMO in COVID-19 depends on VA-ECMO indication, which should be considered in further studies and clinical decision making. A subgroup of patients suffers from acute heart failure due to inflammation, which has to be differentiated into septic or COVID-19 associated. Novel biomarkers are required to ensure reliable differentiation between these entities; a candidate might be soluble interleukin 2 receptor.