Multicentre evaluation of multidisciplinary team meeting agreement on diagnosis in diffuse parenchymal lung disease: a case-cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse parenchymal lung disease represents a diverse and challenging group of pulmonary disorders. A consistent diagnostic approach to diffuse parenchymal lung disease is crucial if clinical trial data are to be applied to individual patients. We aimed to evaluate inter-multidisciplinary team agreement for the diagnosis of diffuse parenchymal lung disease. METHODS: We did a multicentre evaluation of clinical data of patients who presented to the interstitial lung disease unit of the Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust (London, UK; host institution) and required multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) characterisation between March 1, 2010, and Aug 31, 2010. Only patients whose baseline clinical, radiological, and, if biopsy was taken, pathological data were undertaken at the host institution were included. Seven MDTMs, consisting of at least one clinician, radiologist, and pathologist, from seven countries (Denmark, France, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Portugal, and the UK) evaluated cases of diffuse parenchymal lung disease in a two-stage process between Jan 1, and Oct 15, 2015. First, the clinician, radiologist, and pathologist (if lung biopsy was completed) independently evaluated each case, selected up to five differential diagnoses from a choice of diffuse lung diseases, and chose likelihoods (censored at 5% and summing to 100% in each case) for each of their differential diagnoses, without inter-disciplinary consultation. Second, these specialists convened at an MDTM and reviewed all data, selected up to five differential diagnoses, and chose diagnosis likelihoods. We compared inter-observer and inter-MDTM agreements on patient first-choice diagnoses using Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ). We then estimated inter-observer and inter-MDTM agreement on the probability of diagnosis using weighted kappa coefficient (κw). We compared inter-observer and inter-MDTM confidence of patient first-choice diagnosis. Finally, we evaluated the prognostic significance of a first-choice diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) versus not IPF for MDTMs, clinicians, and radiologists, using univariate Cox regression analysis. FINDINGS: 70 patients were included in the final study cohort. Clinicians, radiologists, pathologists, and the MDTMs assigned their patient diagnoses between Jan 1, and Oct 15, 2015. IPF made up 88 (18%) of all 490 MDTM first-choice diagnoses. Inter-MDTM agreement for first-choice diagnoses overall was moderate (κ=0·50). Inter-MDTM agreement on diagnostic likelihoods was good for IPF (κw=0·71 [IQR 0·64-0·77]) and connective tissue disease-related interstitial lung disease (κw=0·73 [0·68-0·78]); moderate for non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP; κw=0·42 [0·37-0·49]); and fair for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (κw=0·29 [0·24-0·40]). High-confidence diagnoses (>65% likelihood) of IPF were given in 68 (77%) of 88 cases by MDTMs, 62 (65%) of 96 cases by clinicians, and in 57 (66%) of 86 cases by radiologists. Greater prognostic separation was shown for an MDTM diagnosis of IPF than compared with individual clinician's diagnosis of this disease in five of seven MDTMs, and radiologist's diagnosis of IPF in four of seven MDTMs. INTERPRETATION: Agreement between MDTMs for diagnosis in diffuse lung disease is acceptable and good for a diagnosis of IPF, as validated by the non-significant greater prognostic separation of an IPF diagnosis made by MDTMs than the separation of a diagnosis made by individual clinicians or radiologists. Furthermore, MDTMs made the diagnosis of IPF with higher confidence and more frequently than did clinicians or radiologists. This difference is of particular importance, because accurate and consistent diagnoses of IPF are needed if clinical outcomes are to be optimised. Inter-multidisciplinary team agreement for a diagnosis of hypersensitivity pneumonitis is low, highlighting an urgent need for standardised diagnostic guidelines for this disease. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research, Imperial College London.

Multidetector row computed tomography to assess changes in airways linked to asthma control.

BACKGROUND: In asthma, multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) detects abnormalities that are related to disease severity, including increased bronchial wall thickness. However, whether these abnormalities could be related to asthma control has not been investigated yet. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine which changes in airways could be linked to disease control. METHODS: Twelve patients with poor asthma control were included and received a salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination daily for 12 weeks. Patients underwent clinical, functional, and MDCT examinations before and after the treatment period. MDCT examinations were performed using a low-dose protocol at a controlled lung volume (65% TLC). Bronchial lumen (LA) and wall areas (WA) were evaluated at a segmental and subsegmental level using BronCare software. Lung density was measured at the base of the lung. Baseline and end-of-treatment data were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: After the 12-week treatment period, asthma control was achieved. Airflow obstruction and air trapping decreased as assessed by the changes in FEV(1) (p < 0.01) and expiratory reserve volume (p < 0.01). Conversely, LA and WA did not vary significantly. However, a median decrease in LA of >10% was observed in half of the patients with a wide intra- and intersubject response heterogeneity. This was concomitant with a decrease in lung density (p < 0.02 in the anteroinferior areas). CONCLUSIONS: MDCT is insensitive for demonstrating any decrease in bronchial wall thickness. This is mainly due to changes in bronchial caliber which may be linked to modifications of the elastic properties of the bronchopulmonary system under treatment.

Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography as first-line preoperative imaging in high-risk patients with lower limb ischemia.

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical relevance of gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography (Gd-MRA) as the first-line angiographic examination for planning lower limb revascularization in patients at high risk of complications after contrast arteriography (CA). METHOD: Forty-five consecutive patients at high risk of post-CA complications because of chronic renal insufficiency, diabetes mellitus, advanced age, or the need for brachial artery catheterization or graft puncture had Gd-MRA as first-line angiography before a surgical or endovascular procedure for lower limb ischemia. RESULTS: After Gd-MRA, 59 procedures were performed, including 38 surgical reconstructions, 17 endovascular procedures, and four amputations. Complementary CA was only required in seven patients for whom a below-knee bypass was planned. Cumulative patency rates at 1 and 24 months were, respectively, 91% and 91% for suprainguinal bypasses, 100% and 92% for infrainguinal above-knee bypasses, 80% and 57% for below-knee bypasses, and 92% and 76% for iliofemoral angioplasties. After 24 months of follow-up, limb salvage, amputation, and mortality rates were, respectively, 86%, 3.5%, and 7% for stage II ischemia and 48%, 11%, and 30% for stages III and IV. CONCLUSION: Gd-MRA can be proposed for first-line preoperative imaging in the management of lower limb ischemia for patients at high risk and permits the selective use of CA as a second-line examination if a below-knee bypass is required.