Implementation of Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Using One-Way Endobronchial Valves: A Retrospective Single-Centre Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) using 1-way endobronchial valves (EBV) has become a guideline treatment in patients with advanced emphysema. Evidence from this minimally invasive treatment derives mainly from well-designed controlled trials conducted in high-volume specialized intervention centres. Little is known about real-life outcome data in hospitals setting up this novel treatment and which favourable conditions are required for a continuous successful program. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we aim to evaluate the eligibility rate for BLVR and whether the implementation of BLVR in our academic hospital is feasible and yields clinically significant outcomes. METHOD: A retrospective evaluation of patients treated with EBV between January 2016 and August 2019 was conducted. COPD assessment test (CAT), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), residual volume (RV), and 6-min walking test (6MWT) were measured at baseline and 3 months after intervention. Paired sample t tests were performed to compare means before and after intervention. RESULTS: Of 350 subjects screened, 283 (81%) were not suitable for intervention mostly due to lack of a target lobe. The remaining 67 subjects (19%) underwent bronchoscopic assessment, and if suitable, valves were placed in the same session. In total, 55 subjects (16%) were treated with EBV of which 10 did not have complete follow-up: 6 subjects had their valves removed because of severe pneumothorax (n = 2) or lack of benefit (n = 4) and the remaining 4 had missing follow-up data. Finally, 45 patients had complete follow-up at 3 months and showed an average change ± SD in CAT -4 ± 6 points, FEV1 +190 ± 140 mL, RV -770 ± 790 mL, and +37 ± 65 m on the 6MWT (all p < 0.001). After 1-year follow-up, 34 (76%) subjects had their EBV in situ. CONCLUSION: Implementing BLVR with EBV is feasible and effective. Only 16% of screened patients were eligible, indicating that this intervention is only applicable in a small subset of highly selected subjects with advanced emphysema, and therefore a high volume of COPD patients is essential for a sustainable BLVR program.

Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Compared to Lung Perfusion Scintigraphy to Assess Pulmonary Perfusion in Patients Screened for Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) using one-way endobronchial valves is a technique to reduce hyperinflation in patients with severe emphysema by inducing collapse of a severely destroyed pulmonary lobe. Patient selection is mainly based on evaluation of emphysema severity on high-resolution computed tomography and evaluation of lung perfusion with perfusion scintigraphy. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced CT scans may be useful for perfusion assessment in emphysema but has not been compared against perfusion scintigraphy. AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare perfusion distribution assessed with dual-energy contrast-enhanced computed tomography and perfusion scintigraphy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients with severe emphysema, who were screened for ELVR, were included. Perfusion was assessed with 99mTc perfusion scintigraphy and using the iodine map calculated from the dual-energy contrast-enhanced CT scans. Perfusion distribution was calculated as usually for the upper, middle, and lower thirds of both lungs with the planar technique and the iodine overlay. RESULTS: Perfusion distribution between the right and left lung showed good correlation (r = 0.8). The limits of agreement of the mean absolute difference in percentage perfusion per region of interest were 0.75-5.6%. The upper lobes showed more severe perfusion reduction than the lower lobes. Mean difference in measured pulmonary perfusion ranged from -2.8% to 2.3%. Lower limit of agreement ranged from -8.9% to 4.6% and upper limit was 3.3-10.0%. CONCLUSION: Quantification of perfusion distribution using planar 99mTc perfusion scintigraphy and iodine overlays calculated from dual-energy contrast-enhanced CTs correlates well with acceptable variability.

Serial measurements in COVID-19-induced acute respiratory disease to unravel heterogeneity of the disease course: design of the Maastricht Intensive Care COVID cohort (MaastrICCht).

INTRODUCTION: The course of the disease in SARS-CoV-2 infection in mechanically ventilated patients is unknown. To unravel the clinical heterogeneity of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in these patients, we designed the prospective observational Maastricht Intensive Care COVID cohort (MaastrICCht). We incorporated serial measurements that harbour aetiological, diagnostic and predictive information. The study aims to investigate the heterogeneity of the natural course of critically ill patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Mechanically ventilated patients admitted to the intensive care with a SARS-CoV-2 infection will be included. We will collect clinical variables, vital parameters, laboratory variables, mechanical ventilator settings, chest electrical impedance tomography, ECGs, echocardiography as well as other imaging modalities to assess heterogeneity of the course of a SARS-CoV-2 infection in critically ill patients. The MaastrICCht is also designed to foster various other studies and registries and intends to create an open-source database for investigators. Therefore, a major part of the data collection is aligned with an existing national intensive care data registry and two international COVID-19 data collection initiatives. Additionally, we create a flexible design, so that additional measures can be added during the ongoing study based on new knowledge obtained from the rapidly growing body of evidence. The spread of the COVID-19 pandemic requires the swift implementation of observational research to unravel heterogeneity of the natural course of the disease of SARS-CoV-2 infection in mechanically ventilated patients. Our study design is expected to enhance aetiological, diagnostic and prognostic understanding of the disease. This paper describes the design of the MaastrICCht. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the medical ethics committee (Medisch Ethische Toetsingscommissie 2020-1565/3 00 523) of the Maastricht University Medical Centre+ (Maastricht UMC+), which will be performed based on the Declaration of Helsinki. During the pandemic, the board of directors of Maastricht UMC+ adopted a policy to inform patients and ask their consent to use the collected data and to store serum samples for COVID-19 research purposes. All study documentation will be stored securely for fifteen years after recruitment of the last patient. The results will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals, with a preference for open access journals, while particularly considering deposition of the manuscripts on a preprint server early. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The Netherlands Trial Register (NL8613).