Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with endobronchial valves for patients with heterogeneous emphysema and intact interlobar fissures (the BeLieVeR-HIFi study): a randomised controlled trial

Bronchoscopic treatment of emphysema: an update

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the major causes of disability and mortality. The efficacy of maximal medical treatment, although effective at the early stages of the disease, becomes limited when extensive alveolar destruction is the main cause of respiratory failure. At this stage of the disease more aggressive options, when feasible, should be considered. Lung transplantation and lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) are currently available for a selected group of patients. Endoscopic alternatives to LVRS have progressively gained acceptance and are currently employed in patients with COPD. They promote lung deflation searching the same outcome as LVRS in terms of respiratory mechanics, ameliorating the distressing symptom of chronic dyspnea by decreasing the physiological dead space.

Lung function improvements in emphysema following pneumonia

We describe two cases of patients with emphysema who, in the lead up to hyperinflation intervention, developed pneumonia with significant physiological, anatomical, functional and quality of life improvement observed following. This directly goes against the natural history of both disease processes, demonstrating the benefit resulting from infective autobullectomy.

CELEB trial: Comparative Effectiveness of Lung volume reduction surgery for Emphysema and Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with valve placement: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Although lung volume reduction surgery and bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with endobronchial valves have both been shown to improve lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life in appropriately selected patients with emphysema, there are no direct comparison data between the two procedures to inform clinical decision-making.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We describe the protocol of the CELEB study, a randomised controlled trial which will compare outcomes at 1 year between the two procedures, using a composite disease severity measure, the iBODE score, which includes body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnoeaand exercise capacity (incremental shuttle walk test).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval to conduct the study has been obtained from the Fulham Research Ethics Committee, London (16/LO/0286). The outcome of this trial will provide information to guide treatment choices in this population and will be presented at national and international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. We will also disseminate the main results to all participants in a letter.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN19684749; Pre-results.

History of lung volume reduction procedures

Lung volume reduction (LVR) procedures for emphysematous patients were firstly introduced in the second half of the twentieth century. Over time, from the first invasive surgical procedures, new less invasive techniques have been conceived. In regards to the surgical approach, the adoption of VATS and the execution, in selected centers, of a non-resectional approach, with folding of less functional lung tissue, reduced mortality and adverse events risks. As regards to the bronchoscopic approach, endobronchial valves (EBV) and intrabronchial valves (IBV) were initially proposed in the early 2000s to obtain segmental or lobar atelectasis of the more compromised lung parenchyma. Despite showing promising results with respect to improvement of pulmonary function tests, particularly forced expiratory volume in 1st second (FEV₁), and quality of life, and a good safety profile, valves showed disappointing results in presence of collateral ventilation, such as in cases of incomplete fissures. To overcome this technical issue, in the last 10 years, endobronchial coils have been designed and used. Having a compressive effect on the lung parenchyma where they are located, they are not affected by collateral ventilation. Randomized control trials (RCTs) on endobronchial coils showed a significant improvement in FEV₁ and quality of life, however this technique was not immune to side effects, particularly low respiratory tract infections and pneumothoraces. Besides bronchial valves (BV) and coils, airway by-pass stents have also been evaluated in a RCT but without reaching the desired endpoints. Other innovative procedures recently considered and delivered through bronchoscopy regards thermal energy, with vapour therapy, to achieve a scarring reaction of the emphysematous lung parenchyma, and polymeric foams used as lung sealants to achieve absorptive atelectasis. In conclusion, LVR procedures may be considered in carefully selected patients with symptomatic emphysema and severe lung hyperinflation, and might be personalized according to the anatomical characteristics of emphysematous area.

Complications related to endoscopic lung volume reduction for emphysema with endobronchial valves: results of a multicenter study

Background

Despite bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) with valves is a minimally invasive treatment for emphysema, it can associate with some complications. We aimed at evaluating the rate and type of complications related to valve treatment and their impact on clinical outcomes.

Methods

It is a retrospective multicenter study including all consecutive patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema undergoing BLVR with endobronchial valve treatment and developed any complications related to this procedure. The type of complication, the time of onset, the treatment required and the out-come were evaluated. Response to treatment was assessed according to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) as follows: an improvement of ≥15% in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁); of -8% in residual volume (RV); of ≥26 m in 6-minnute walking distance (6MWD); and of ≥4 points on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Target lobe volume reduction (TLVR) ≥350 mL was considered significant.

Results

One hundred and seven out of 423 (25.3%) treated patients had complications related to valve treatment including pneumothorax (17.3%); pneumonia (1.7%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation (0.9%), respiratory failure (1.4%), valve migration (2.1%), and hemoptysis (1.9%). In all cases complications resolved with appropriate treatment including removal of valves in 21/107 cases (19.6%). Patients with TLVR ≥350 mL (n=64) vs. those <350 mL (n=43) had a statistically significant higher improvement in FEV₁ (19.0%±3.9% vs. 3.0%±0.9%; P=0.0003); in RV (-10.0%±4.8% vs. -4.0%±2.9%; P=0.002); in 6MWD (33.0±19.0 vs. 12.0±6.3 metres; P=0.001); and in SGRQ (-15.0±2.9 vs. -8.0±3.5 points; P=0.01). Only patients with TLVR ≥350 mL met or exceeded the MCID cut-off criteria for FEV₁ (19.0%±3.9%), RV (-10.0%±4.8%), 6MWT (33.0±19.0 metres), and SGQR (-15.0±2.9 points). Five patients (1.2%) died during follow-up for causes not related to valves treatment neither to any of the complications described.

Conclusions

Valve treatment is a safe and reversible procedure. The presence of complications seems not to have a significant impact on clinical outcome in patients with lobar atelectasis. Due to poor clinical conditions and possible complications, BLVR should be performed in high volume centers with a multidisciplinary approach.

The role of a multidisciplinary severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease hyperinflation service in patient selection for lung volume reduction

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a complex disease and the management is focused on improving breathlessness, quality of life and healthcare utilisation. Our understanding of COPD phenotypes has improved in recent years and there is an increased drive towards delivering phenotype-based therapies. Lung volume reduction can offer the prospect of life changing benefit in breathlessness and quality of life in a select group of patients with severe emphysema already receiving maximum medical treatment. In spite of the available evidence, very few procedures are being performed relative to the disease burden and prevalence of suitable individuals. Currently the major barriers to patient accessibility are lack in standardised multidisciplinary severe COPD services with easy access to lung volume reduction procedures, as well as poorly informed perceptions of healthcare professionals. There is a recognised need to improve such services in many healthcare systems. We share our experiences with setting up and running a successful regional multidisciplinary severe COPD hyperinflation service.

[Personalised COPD care: Where are we going?]

The concept of personalised medicine is recent but the underlying notions are not new: knowing how to adapt care to patients' characteristics is one of the components of the "art of medicine". The advances of science allow to refine considerably the applications of the concept in many fields of medicine including COPD: research has identified phenotypes, endotypes and treatable traits. Personalisation can be applied to all components of care. For instance, the decision to perform screening spirometry relies not only on risk factors (age, smoking, other exposures) but also on symptoms. Assessment of comorbidities often associated with COPD is based on risk factors and their combinations, variable between individuals. Rehabilitation and its components are in essence highly individualised, which a major condition for their success. Last but not least, personalisation of pharmacological therapy, which has long been rather poor, could not benefit from biomarkers of interest (predictive of response), such as blood eosinophil count. Practical strategies using these still need to be established, and new biomarkers may usefully enrich the collection!

Chartis Measurement of Collateral Ventilation: Conscious Sedation versus General Anesthesia - A Retrospective Comparison

BACKGROUND

Absence of interlobar collateral ventilation using the Chartis measurement is the key predictor for successful endobronchial valve treatment in severe emphysema. Chartis was originally validated in spontaneous breathing patients under conscious sedation (CS); however, this can be challenging due to cough, mucus secretion, mucosal swelling, and bronchoconstriction. Performing Chartis under general anesthesia (GA) avoids these problems and may result in an easier procedure with a higher success rate. However, using Chartis under GA with positive pressure ventilation has not been validated.

OBJECTIVES

In this study we investigated the impact of anesthesia technique, CS versus GA, on the feasibility and outcomes of Chartis measurement.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all Chartis measurements performed at our hospital from October 2010 until December 2017.

RESULTS

We analyzed 250 emphysema patients (median forced expiratory volume in 1 s 26%, range 12-52% predicted). In 121 patients (48%) the measurement was performed using CS, in 124 (50%) using GA, and in 5 (2%) both anesthesia techniques were used. In total, 746 Chartis readings were analyzed (432 CS, 277 GA, and 37 combination). Testing under CS took significantly longer than GA (median 19 min [range 5-65] vs. 11 min [3-35], p < 0.001) and required more measurements (3 [1-13] vs. 2 [1-6], p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in target lobe volume reduction after treatment (-1,123 mL [-3,604 to 332] in CS vs. -1,251 mL [-3,333 to -1] in GA, p = 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, Chartis measurement under CS took significantly longer and required more measurements than under GA, without a difference in treatment outcome. We recommend a prospective trial comparing both techniques within the same patients to validate this approach.

New trends in interventional pulmonology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As the field of interventional pulmonology continues to expand and develop at a rapid pace, anesthesiologists are increasingly called upon to provide well tolerated anesthetic care during these procedures. These patients may not be candidates for surgical treatment and often have multiple comorbidities. It is important for anesthesiologists to familiarize themselves with these procedures and their associated risks and complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

The scope of the interventional pulmonologist's practice is varied and includes both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Bronchial thermoplasty is now offered as endoscopic treatment of severe asthma. Endobronchial lung volume reduction procedures are currently undergoing clinical trials and may become more commonplace. Interventional pulmonologists are performing medical thoracoscopy for the treatment and diagnosis of pleural disorders. Interventional radiologists are performing complex pulmonary procedures, often requiring anesthesia.

SUMMARY

The review summarizes the procedures now commonly performed by interventional pulmonologists and interventional radiologists. It discusses the anesthetic considerations for and common complications of these procedures to prepare anesthesiologists to safely care for these patients. Investigational techniques are also described.

Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction in COPD: Improvements in Gas Transfer Capacity Are Associated With Improvements in Ventilation and Perfusion Matching

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) has been shown to improve lung function, quality of life, and exercise tolerance in patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema. Our study aims to determine the effect of ELVR on gas transfer capacity corrected for alveolar volume (KCO) and investigate the relationship between KCO and ventilation and perfusion (VQ) matching. We speculate on possible mechanisms for the observed changes METHODS:: Patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were prospectively recruited and underwent unilateral upper lobe ELVR between 2012 and 2014. Each had respiratory function test and differential VQ scans at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 12-month post-ELVR.

RESULTS

In total, 11 patients had 3 sets of respiratory function test (at baseline, 1, and 3 mo), whereas 7 had 4 sets (at baseline, 1, 3, and 12 mo). KCO improved by 10.3 (±7.5)% at 1 month (P=NS) and 39.8 (±15.4)% at 12 months (P<0.05). VQ of the nontargeted lung increased by 12.8 (±5.6)% and 7.9 (±2.3)%, respectively at 1 month, whereas those of the targeted lung both decreased (P<0.05). At 3 and 12 months, the VQ changes were similar to those at 1 month, though some were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

ELVR results in improved KCO for at least 12 months. This may be explained by the VQ redistribution to the nontargeted and less emphysematous lung with improved VQ matching.

Thermic and chemical procedures for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction

In the last 14 years several endoscopic procedures have been developed to offer patients with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and emphysema further therapeutic options, complementary to a medical treatment. In addition to the established valve implantation, new approaches have been available since 2009. These procedures include bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation (BTVA) and polymeric lung volume reduction. Both therapies are independent of collateral ventilation (CV), are irreversible and can be used on segmental (BTVA) and sub-segmental level [polymeric lung volume reduction (PLVR)], in contrast to valve therapy. The intention is to induce a local inflammation with a following fibrosis and shrinkage and thus a volume reduction in the treated lung areas. Currently, only patients with predominant upper-lobe emphysema are treated. An improvement of lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life could be proved in RCTs for BTVA as well as for PLVR. However, the data for PLVR is very limited and has recently been available only in studies. Furthermore, the risk profile is unfavourable with a high number of adverse respiratory events. While BTVA is an established new approach, the PLVR requires re-evaluation regarding materials, predictive factors, safety profile and dosage.

Successful lung volume reduction surgery in combined pulmonary emphysema and fibrosis without body-plethysmographic hyperinflation-a case report

Surgical and bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (LVR) have been demonstrated to improve lung function, dyspnea and quality of life in patients with severe pulmonary emphysema. The most important functional prerequisite for a successful LVR is hyperinflation measured by body plethysmography. A residual volume (RV) of more than 180% predicted and a RV/total lung capacity (TLC) ratio of more than 0.58 were inclusion criteria in major LVR trials. Here we report a successful LVR in a 68-year-old man with advanced, heterogeneous emphysema without plethysmographic evidence of severe hyperinflation (RV/TLC 0.45). Computed tomography (CT) revealed severe, partly bullous upper lobe emphysema and subtle fibrotic changes with volume loss of lower lobes. Since lower lobes appeared compressed by upper lobe emphysema, these target areas were removed by thoracoscopic LVR. Four months later, the patient reported major improvements of dyspnea, FEV₁ (by 1.27 L) and 6-minute walking distance (by 150 meters). LVR reduced total lung volume measured by CT-volumetry by 0.5 L and upper lobe volume by 1.85 L while lower lobe volume increased by +1.34 L. Low density volume (-950 HU) reflecting emphysema was reduced by 1.73 L. We conclude that the opposing effects of emphysema and fibrosis resulted in a barely increase in total lung volume that was only slightly reduced by LVR. Nevertheless, resection of emphysematous target areas identified by quantitative CT analysis provided major clinical and physiologic improvements related to decompression of low-compliance lower lobe areas retracted by early fibrosis. Therefore, in the combined presence of severe, heterogeneously distributed emphysema and fibrosis, LVR may improve respiratory mechanics even if RV/TLC, an established body-plethysmographic predictor of LVR success is not severely elevated.

Emphysema and lung volume reduction: the role of radiology

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. One of the main findings is pulmonary emphysema in association with chronic bronchitis. Clinical signs, pulmonary function tests and imaging are the current used methods to diagnose and stage emphysema. Lung volume reduction (LVR) and endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) are the current therapeutic options beside lung transplantation in cases of severe emphysema. Nowadays imaging is one of the key factors for the success of these therapies. Especially quantitative computed tomography (CT) with its increasing possibilities has become a viable tool, providing detailed information about distribution and heterogeneity of emphysema. Other imaging techniques like dual-energy CT (DECT) and functional magnetic resonance (MR) have shown to add functional information. These structural and functional information support thoracic surgeons and interventional pulmonologists in selecting patients and optimizing LVR procedures but also enables the development of new endobronchial therapies. Imaging will further improve the individual outcome by supporting the choice of optimal therapy.

Lung volume reduction surgery or bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: is there an algorithm for allocation?

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death in the world with the annual number of deaths increasing every year. Alterations in chest wall mechanics, respiratory muscle mechanics, and impaired cardiac function that result from increased air-trapping are well known sequelae of COPD and contribute to increased morbidity and mortality. A reduction in hyperinflation can improve cardiopulmonary function. In selected patients with COPD and an emphysema phenotype, lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has demonstrated improvements in symptom burden and mortality. Minimally invasive bronchoscopic techniques that reduce end-expiratory lung volume have shown improvements in lung function, dyspnea and quality of life. In this review, we review selection criteria, risks, and benefits of surgical and bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR). Recommendations are provided to guide treatment decisions based on the current literature.

Valve therapy in patients with emphysematous type of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): from randomized trials to patient selection in clinical practice

In recent years a number of endoscopic methods have emerged to treat patients with severe emphysematous type of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), who are primarily symptomatic due to hyperinflation despite optimal medical management. Of these techniques, implantation of endobronchial one-way valves into targeted airways of isolated emphysematous lobes appears to be one of the most promising innovations. Results from randomized controlled trials of valve therapy for emphysema show consistent benefits in terms of lung function, exercise capacity, symptoms, and quality of life. This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of the currently available scientific data, discussion of typical treatment related side effects, and recommendations for patient selection in clinical practice.

Complications after bronchoscopic lung volume reduction

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) has been demonstrated an efficient and safe alternative to surgery in multiple randomized trials and retrospective cohort studies. However, despite its minimal invasiveness BLVR is not without potential harm. Complications and their incidents differ significantly between the individual BLVR techniques (valves, coils, vapour or sealant) which are bearing varying device- and intervention-dependent risks. Interventional pulmonologists must be aware of potential side effects and their management to anticipate and ensure highest quality treatment of the severely ill emphysema patient.

The role of the multidisciplinary emphysema team meeting in the provision of lung volume reduction

Despite a positive result in favour of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS), from one of the largest randomized controlled trial in thoracic surgery, the identification of poor outcome in certain high-risk groups has resulted in a worldwide decrease in its utilization. Patient selection is the key to successful lung volume reduction which, with the advent of a range of less invasive techniques, has become more complex. The greater variety of potential therapeutic options will inevitably lead to debate amongst treating clinicians. Therefore, to be able to make an informed decision on the best treatment for an individual patient, discussion between clinicians in a multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting is advisable. The membership of this MDT must include all specialists involved in assessment and subsequent treatment of the patient including non-medical input. There must be robust administrative organization and record of decisions together with inter-disciplinary communication of decisions. Whilst ultimately it is the patient who will benefit from the MDT, individual participants will enhance their continued professional development. The referral pathway into the MDT must be clearly defined and disseminated. Which investigations are to be performed by referrers and which by the specialist centre need to be in an agreed protocol. Specialist input may be required to interpret the results of the latest assessment tools. The decision-making process of the MDT begins with confirmation of basic selection criteria but addresses three main areas of discussion: the definition of target areas of lung for reduction; the presence of collateral, interlobar ventilation and an assessment of individualized risk and benefit. The emphysema or lung volume reduction MDT has been established in several specialist units and its benefits include an increase in referrals overall for LVR. The establishment of an MDT approach to lung volume reduction has now been incorporated into several national guidelines.

Clinical and quantitative computed tomography predictors of response to endobronchial lung volume reduction therapy using coils

Objectives

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction using coils (LVRC) is a well-known treatment option for severe emphysema. The purpose of this study was to identify quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and clinical parameters associated with positive treatment outcome.

Patients and methods

The CT scans, pulmonary function tests (PFT), and 6-minute walk test (6-MWT) data were collected from 72 patients with advanced emphysema prior to and at 3 months after LVRC treatment. The procedure involved placing 10 coils unilaterally. Various QCT parameters were derived using Apollo imaging software (VIDA). Independent predictors of clinically relevant outcome (Δ6-MWT ≥ 26 m, ΔFEV₁ ≥ 12%, ΔRV ≥ 10%) were identified through stepwise linear regression analysis.

Results

The response outcome for Δ6-MWT, for ΔFEV₁ and for ΔRV was met by 55%, 32% and 42%, respectively. For Δ6-MWT ≥ 26 m a lower baseline 6-MWT (p = 0.0003) and a larger standard deviation (SD) of low attenuation cluster (LAC) sizes in peripheral regions of treated lung (p = 0.0037) were significantly associated with positive outcome. For ΔFEV₁ ≥ 12%, lower baseline FEV₁ (p = 0.02) and larger median LAC sizes in the central regions of treated lobe (p = 0.0018) were significant predictors of good response. For ΔRV ≥ 10% a greater baseline TLC (p = 0.0014) and a larger SD of LAC sizes in peripheral regions of treated lung (p = 0.007) tended to respond better.

Conclusion

Patients with lower FEV₁ and 6-MWT, with higher TLC and specific QCT characteristics responded more positively to LVRC treatment, suggesting a more targeted CT-based approach to patient selection could lead to greater efficacy in treatment response.

Endoscopic approaches for treating emphysema

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatment of severe pulmonary emphysema has so far been associated with relatively high perioperative morbidity and mortality. In the past two decades, novel approaches to lung volume reduction and alternative minimally invasive endoscopic techniques have been developed. This review presents the different techniques (blocking and nonblocking) available until present as well as the appropriate patient selection and possible complications. Areas covered: All available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been evaluated. The only blocking technique is the reversible valve implantation. It results in lobar volume reduction and clinical benefit in emphysema patients with absent interlobar collateral ventilation and its efficacy has been confirmed in various RCTs. Non-blocking techniques that are independent of collateral ventilation include the partially irreversible coil implantation leading to parenchymal compression, the irreversible bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation, and the polymeric lung volume reduction both inducing inflammatory reaction. These methods have been up to date examined in a few RCTs only. Finally, the targeted lung denervation aims at sustainable bronchodilation by ablation of parasympathetic pulmonary nerves. Expert commentary: Future studies must address the predictors of clinical outcome as well as the reduction of complications to improve both outcome and safety.

Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction: A 2018 Review and Update

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) procedure has expanded the treatment spectrum of patients with end-stage emphysema. These treatments include valve, coil, thermal vapor ablation, bio-lung volume reduction, targeted lung denervation, and airway bypass stent. This short review provides an up-to-date information on BLVR treatments, their clinical benefits, and an overview of complications. BLVR treatments generally affect dyspnea by reducing hyperinflation and residual volume (RV). Benefits of treatment are associated with improvement in lung function parameters (forced expiration volume in the first second, total lung capacity, RV, and 6-minute walking test) and quality of life. Serious potential pulmonary complications, such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation, may also occur after BLVR treatment. In addition to these, low-cost BLVR methods, such as autologous blood and fibrin glue, are in the developmental stage. Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction treatments are a promising method with positive results for patients with severe emphysema. The widespread use of these techniques, inadequate selection of patients, and non-critical and, therefore, unsuccessful use of BLVR in non-specialist centers lead to a false negative impression of the effectiveness of these techniques. In addition to these considerations, it is obvious that these treatments, which are quite expensive, are burdening social health systems. The reduction of costs or the development of lower-cost treatment methods is important for the future and for the availability of treatments.

Interventional pulmonology in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and emphysema are widespread diseases associated with progressive dyspnea because of airflow limitation and hyperinflation. Fundamental therapeutic strategies consist of pulmonary rehabilitation, pharmacotherapy, long-term oxygen therapy, noninvasive ventilation, and surgical therapeutic approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last 14 years, endoscopic therapeutic modalities emerged as a substantial part of severe COPD and emphysema treatment. Techniques of the endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) aim at reduction of hyperinflation. Thereby, the reversible valve implantation of which the efficacy was confirmed in various randomized controlled trials (RCT) results in lobar volume reduction and clinical benefit in emphysema patients with absent interlobar collateral ventilation. Nonblocking ELVR methods that are independent of collateral ventilation include the partially irreversible coil implantation leading to parenchymal compression, the irreversible bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation and polymeric lung volume reduction both inducing inflammatory reaction. The nonblocking methods have been examined in only a few RCTs. The targeted lung denervation as a novel bronchoscopic therapy for COPD patients aims at sustainable bronchodilation by ablation of parasympathetic pulmonary nerves.

SUMMARY

The review summarizes the various endoscopic treatment approaches for managment of COPD and emphysema, their mechanism of action, their complications and the current available results of the most important RCTs.

The Challenges of Precision Medicine in COPD

Pheno-/endotyping chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is really important because it provides patients with precise and personalized medicine. The central concept of precision medicine is to take individual variability into account when making management decisions. Precision medicine should ensure that patients get the right treatment at the right dose at the right time, with minimum harmful consequences and maximum efficacy. Ideally, we should search for genetic and molecular biomarker-based profiles. Given the clinical complexity of COPD, it seems likely that a panel of several biomarkers will be required to characterize pathogenetic factors and their course over time. The need for biomarkers to guide the clinical care of individuals with COPD and to enhance the possibilities of success in drug development is clear and urgent, but biomarker development is tremendously challenging and expensive, and translation of research efforts to date has been largely ineffective. Furthermore, the development of personalized treatments will require a much more detailed understanding of the clinical and biological heterogeneity of COPD. Therefore, we are still far from being able to apply precision medicine in COPD and the treatable traits and FEV₁-free approaches are attempts to precision medicine in COPD that must be considered still quite unsophisticated.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: recent updates

Emphysema causes significant morbidity and mortality, incurring both financial and psychosocial costs. Alternatives to medical therapy and surgical lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) have increased interest in bronchoscopic techniques. Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) is still in its infancy and additional trials and follow-up are critical. However, several new randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated improvement in lung function, quality of life and exercise capacity in select patients receiving endobronchial valves and coil therapy. This article highlights recent data regarding bronchoscopic treatment of emphysema.

Endobronchial Coils Versus Lung Volume Reduction Surgery or Medical Therapy for Treatment of Advanced Homogenous Emphysema

Rationale: Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction utilizing shape-memory nitinol endobronchial coils (EBC) may be safer and more effective in severely hyperinflated homogeneous emphysema compared to medical therapy or lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). Methods: The effect of bilateral EBC in patients with homogeneous emphysema on spirometry, lung volumes and survival was compared to patients with homogeneous emphysema randomized in the National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) to LVRS or medical therapy. NETT participants were selected to match EBC participants in age, baseline spirometry, and gender. Outcomes were compared from baseline, at 6 and 12 months. Results: There were no significant baseline differences in gender in the EBC, NETT-LVRS or medical treatment patients. At baseline no differences existed between EBC and NETT-LVRS patients in forced expiratory volume in 1 second ( FEV₁) or total lung capacity (TLC) %-predicted; residual volume (RV) and diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLco) %-predicted were higher in the EBC group compared to NETT-LVRS (p < 0.001). Compared to the medical treatment group, EBC produced greater improvements in FEV₁ and RV but not TLC at 6 months. FEV₁ and RV in the EBC group remained significantly improved at 12-months compared to the medical treatment group. While all 3 therapies improved quality of life, survival at 12 months with EBC or medical therapy was greater than NETT-LVRS. Conclusion: EBC may be a potential therapeutic option in patients with severe homogeneous emphysema and hyperinflation who are already receiving optimal medical treatment.

New bacterial growth in bronchial secretions after bronchoscopic valve implantation

Background

Bronchoscopic valve implantation is an established treatment in selected patients with severe lung emphysema. There is evidence in literature of increased bacterial colonization of various implants. So far, it is unclear if an increased bacterial colonization can also be observed after endoscopic valve therapy.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients with examination of the bronchial secretions for presence or change of bacterial growth before and after valve implantation.

Results

Overall, 144 patients who underwent bronchoscopic follow-up after valve implantation were included in this analysis. Prior to valve placement, only 7 out of 144 consecutive emphysema patients (5%) presented with evidence of bacterial colonization, whereas 137 patients (95%) showed no bacterial growth prior to valve placement. One hundred seven out of the 137 patients (78%) showed new bacterial growth after valve implantation. Almost 38% of the patients who presented with a new bacterial growth had evidence of Viridans streptococci, Rothia mucilaginousa and Neisseria species simultaneously, as bacterial colonization. Pathogenic bacterial growth was recorded for Staphylococcus aureus (18%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (13%) and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (9%) microorganisms. There was also a significant bacterial growth by Moraxella catarrhalis (26%) and anaerobic bacteria (23%), especially in patients with complete atelectasis after successful endoscopic lung volume reduction. For all of the 7 patients, the presented initial bacterial colonization showed a change in the flora after bronchoscopy valve implantation.

Conclusion

In this study we observed an increased bacterial colonization in the long term after valve implantation. This finding needs further evaluation regarding its possible clinical relevance but should be taken into consideration in the follow-up of these patients.

On the Potential Role of MRI Biomarkers of COPD to Guide Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

In patients with severe emphysema and poor quality of life, bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) may be considered and guided based on lobar emphysema severity. In particular, x-ray computed tomography (CT) emphysema measurements are used to identify the most diseased and the second-most diseased lobes as BLVR targets. Inhaled gas magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) also provides chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) biomarkers of lobar emphysema and ventilation abnormalities. Our objective was to retrospectively evaluate CT and MRI biomarkers of lobar emphysema and ventilation in patients with COPD eligible for BLVR. We hypothesized that MRI would provide complementary biomarkers of emphysema and ventilation that help determine the most appropriate lung lobar targets for BLVR in patients with COPD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 22 BLVR-eligible patients from the Thoracic Imaging Network of Canada cohort (diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide = 37 ± 12%_predicted, forced expiratory volume in 1 second = 34 ± 7%_predicted, total lung capacity = 131 ± 17%_predicted, and residual volume = 216 ± 36%_predicted). Lobar CT emphysema, measured using a relative area of <-950 Hounsfield units (RA₉₅₀) and MRI ventilation defect percent, was independently used to rank lung lobe disease severity.

RESULTS

In 7 of 22 patients, there were different CT and MRI predictions of the most diseased lobe. In some patients, there were large ventilation defects in lobes not targeted by CT, indicative of a poorly ventilated lung. CT and MRI classification of the most diseased and the second-most diseased lobes showed a fair-to-moderate intermethod reliability (Cohen κ = 0.40-0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

In this proof-of-concept retrospective analysis, quantitative MRI ventilation and CT emphysema measurements provided different BLVR targets in over 30% of the patients. The presence of large MRI ventilation defects in lobes next to CT-targeted lobes might also change the decision to proceed or to guide BLVR to a different lobar target.

The minimal important difference for target lobe volume reduction after endoscopic valve therapy

Objective

Endoscopic valve therapy aims at target lobe volume reduction (TLVR) that is associated with improved lung function, exercise tolerance and quality of life in emphysema patients. So far, a TLVR of >350 mL was considered to be indicative of a positive response to treatment. However, it is not really known what amount of TLVR is crucial following valve implantation.

Patients and methods

TLVR, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), residual volume (RV) and 6-minute walk distance (6-MWD) were assessed before and 3 months after valve implantation in 119 patients. TLVR was calculated based on computed tomography (CT) scan analysis using imaging software (Apollo; VIDA Diagnostics). Minimal important difference estimates were calculated by anchor-based and distribution-based methods.

Results

Patients treated with valves experienced a mean change of 0.11 L in FEV₁, −0.51 L in RV, 44 m in 6-MWD and a TLVR of 945 mL. Using a linear regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis based on two of three anchors (ΔFEV₁, ΔRV), the estimated minimal important difference for TLVR was between 890 and 1,070 mL (ie, 49%–54% of the baseline TLV).

Conclusion

In future, a TLVR between 49% and 54% of the baseline TLV, should be used when interpreting the clinical relevance.

[Not Available]

Zusammenfassung. Die endoskopische Lungenvolumenreduktion (ELVR) hat sich in den vergangenen Jahren in ausgewählten Patienten mit schwerem Lungenemphysem als valable Alternative zur chirurgischen Lungenvolumenreduktion etabliert. Die Wahl der ELVR-Technik richtet sich danach, ob zwischen dem zu behandelnden und dem benachbarten Lungenlappen Kollateralventilation vorhanden ist, was mittels computertomografischer und endoskopischer Techniken festgestellt werden kann. Als Vorteile der ELVR-Verfahren sind die geringe Invasivität mit entsprechend geringer Mortalität und Morbidität bei niedrigen Kosten zu nennen, zudem ist die Ventileinlage bei Bedarf reversibel. Die Wirksamkeit der ELVR-Verfahren (Ventile, Coils) wurde in mehreren prospektiven, randomisierten Studien belegt. Die Wahl des für den Patienten geeigneten Verfahrens zur Lungenvolumenreduktion sollte weiterhin in einer interdisziplinären Besprechung mit Thoraxchirurgen und spezialisierten Pneumologen erfolgen. La réduction du volume pulmonaire par endoscopie est devenue une importante alternative à la chirurgie chez les malades présentant un emphysème pulmonaire sévère. Le choix de la technique au niveau individuel dépend principalement de l’intégrité de la fissure interlobaire et de la présence d’une ventilation collatérale, cette dernière pouvant être déterminée par tomographie computérisée quantitative et des techniques endoscopiques. Les avantages de la réduction du volume pulmonaire par endoscopie consistent en son caractère minimalement invasif ( procédure utilisant un orifice naturel) et des coûts potentiellement réduits. Par ailleurs ce mode de réduction du volume pulmonaire permet de restaurer la ventilation en cas de besoin. Le choix de la technique appropriée chez un malade donné devrait être discuté de manière interdisciplinaire dans le cadre d’un groupe comportant des pneumologues interventionnels et des chirurgiens thoraciques.

A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Zephyr Endobronchial Valve Treatment in Heterogeneous Emphysema (TRANSFORM)

RATIONALE

Single-center randomized controlled trials of the Zephyr endobronchial valve (EBV) treatment have demonstrated benefit in severe heterogeneous emphysema. This is the first multicenter study evaluating this treatment approach.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Zephyr EBVs in patients with heterogeneous emphysema and absence of collateral ventilation.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter 2:1 randomized controlled trial of EBVs plus standard of care or standard of care alone (SoC). Primary outcome at 3 months post-procedure was the percentage of subjects with FEV₁ improvement from baseline of 12% or greater. Changes in FEV₁, residual volume, 6-minute-walk distance, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire score, and modified Medical Research Council score were assessed at 3 and 6 months, and target lobe volume reduction on chest computed tomography at 3 months.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Ninety seven subjects were randomized to EBV (n = 65) or SoC (n = 32). At 3 months, 55.4% of EBV and 6.5% of SoC subjects had an FEV₁ improvement of 12% or more (P < 0.001). Improvements were maintained at 6 months: EBV 56.3% versus SoC 3.2% (P < 0.001), with a mean ± SD change in FEV₁ at 6 months of 20.7 ± 29.6% and -8.6 ± 13.0%, respectively. A total of 89.8% of EBV subjects had target lobe volume reduction greater than or equal to 350 ml, mean 1.09 ± 0.62 L (P < 0.001). Between-group differences for changes at 6 months were statistically and clinically significant: ΔEBV-SoC for residual volume, -700 ml; 6-minute-walk distance, +78.7 m; St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire score, -6.5 points; modified Medical Research Council dyspnea score, -0.6 points; and BODE (body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity) index, -1.8 points (all P < 0.05). Pneumothorax was the most common adverse event, occurring in 19 of 65 (29.2%) of EBV subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

EBV treatment in hyperinflated patients with heterogeneous emphysema without collateral ventilation resulted in clinically meaningful benefits in lung function, dyspnea, exercise tolerance, and quality of life, with an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02022683).

Microbiological airway colonization in COPD patients with severe emphysema undergoing endoscopic lung volume reduction

Background

Endoscopic lung volume reduction (eLVR) is a therapeutic option for selected patients with COPD and severe emphysema. Infectious exacerbations are serious events in these vulnerable patients; hence, prophylactic antibiotics are often prescribed postinterventionally. However, data on the microbiological airway colonization at the time of eLVR are scarce, and there are no evidence-based recommendations regarding a rational antibiotic regimen.

Objective

The aim of this study was to perform a clinical and microbiological analysis of COPD patients with advanced emphysema undergoing eLVR with endobronchial valves at a single German University hospital, 2012–2017.

Patients and methods

Bronchial aspirates were obtained prior to eLVR and sent for microbiological analysis. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacterial isolates was performed, and pathogen colonization was retrospectively compared with clinical parameters.

Results

At least one potential pathogen was found in 47% (30/64) of patients. Overall, Gram-negative bacteria constituted the most frequently detected pathogens. The single most prevalent species were Haemophilus influenzae (9%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (6%), and Staphylococcus aureus (6%). No multidrug resistance was observed, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa occurred in <5% of samples. Patients without microbiological airway colonization showed more severe airflow limitation, hyperinflation, and chronic hypercapnia compared to those with detected pathogens.

Conclusion

Microbiological airway colonization was frequent in patients undergoing eLVR but not directly associated with poorer functional status. Resistance testing results do not support the routine use of antipseudomonal antibiotics in these patients.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with endobronchial valves for heterogeneous emphysema: long-term results

Background

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) with implant of one-way endobronchial valves (EBV) is a feasible treatment for management of heterogeneous emphysema (HE) with clinical benefits in the early follow-up. We aimed to evaluate the long-terms results and safety of this procedure in a consecutive series of patients with HE.

Methods

It was a retrospective single center study including all consecutive patients with HE undergoing EBV treatment and completing at least 5 years of long-term follow-up. Patients were splitted into Collapse and No-Collapse Group if a lobar collapse or not were obtained after valves implant. The difference of functional data and quality of life (QoL) before and after the procedure (measured at 3, 6, 9, 12 months from the valve implantation, and then annually up to a maximum of 5 years) were statistically evaluated to show the long-term benefits of the procedure (primary endpoint). Yet, morbidity, mortality and survival rates were also recorded to show the safe of the treatment (secondary endpoint).

Results

Thirty-three patients were included in the study. Of these, three patients underwent a bilateral treatment. Collapse Group patients (n=27) presented a significant improvement in FEV1% (+17%; P=0.001); in FVC% (+18%; P=0.002); in RV% (-39%; P=0.003); in 6MWT (P=0.001) and in SGRQ (P=0.001) in the early 12 months of follow-up and no significant decline was seen later. Conversely, No-Collapse Group (n=9) did not have significant benefits. No major complications and death related to the procedure were observed. The 1-,2-,3-,4- and 5-year survival rates were 100%, 90%, 78%, 71% and 71%, respectively. Collapse Group had a better survival than No-Collapse Group (45 vs. 24 months; P=0.001).

Conclusions

Our study confirmed that the lobar collapse is the key success of EBV treatment and the early improvements of respiratory function could be maintained up to five years from the valves implant.

Endobronchial valves for emphysema: an individual patient-level reanalysis of randomised controlled trials

Introduction

Endobronchial valve placement has potential as a treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, a robust evidence base will be needed to convince commissioners of healthcare that it is a high-value treatment. We sought to develop the evidence base by performing an individual patient-level analysis of randomised controlled trials in people with heterogeneous emphysema and an absence of collateral ventilation.

Methods

A literature search (PROSPERO register CRD42016048127) identified two trials meeting these criteria, the BelieVeR-HIFi and STELVIO studies. Anonymised individual patient data were obtained from investigators and analysed. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) from baseline between the treatment and control groups. Secondary end points were change from baseline in 6 min walk distance (6MWD), Medical Research Council dyspnoea score and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ).

Results

114 individuals were treated with 3-month to 6-month follow-up data available for 101 individuals. FEV₁ improved by 23.1 (±28.3)% in patients treated with valves with a mean (95% CI) difference in response between groups of 17.8 (26.5, 9.2)% (p<0.0001). Relative to controls valve placement was associated with a fall in residual volume of 0.64 (0.43, 0.86) L (p<0.0001), a 9.5 (3.5, 15.6) unit fall in SGRQ (p=0.0022) and a 64.2 (94.0, 34.5) m increase in 6MWD. There were three deaths in the treatment arm and the pneumothorax rate was 15%.

Conclusions

These data strengthen the evidence that endobronchial valve treatment can produce clinically meaningful improvements in appropriately selected COPD patients.

Hybrid bilobectomy for treatment of an early-stage lung cancer in a patient with severe emphysema using the benefits of lung volume reduction

Patients with resectable lung cancer and concomitant emphysema can fall outside the accepted guidelines for surgery. Lung volume reduction can improve their lung function but involves resecting an emphysematous lobe containing the tumour. Volume reduction can also be achieved by endobronchial one-way valve insertion, causing lobar collapse, but intact fissures are required. A 'hybrid bilobectomy' was performed on a 77-year-old ex-smoker with suspected T2aN0M0 bronchogenic carcinoma and severe pulmonary emphysema. The procedure consisted of endobronchial right lower lobe volume reduction and video-assisted middle lobectomy with stapled completion of the oblique fissure. Complete collapse of the right lower lobe was confirmed intraoperatively and on follow-up chest films. The recovery period was complicated by a prolonged air leak. We believe that concomitant endobronchial volume reduction of an ipsilateral lobe can facilitate video-assisted lobectomy in high-risk patients with severe emphysema. The success of endobronchial valves to achieve a hybrid bilobectomy is increased by stapled completion of fissure to prevent collateral ventilation.

Efficacy and safety of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction therapy in patients with severe emphysema: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Increasing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) is effective for severe emphysema. In this meta-analysis, we investigated the efficacy and safety of BLVR in patients with severe emphysema.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library and reference lists of related articles were searched, and RCTs that evaluated BLVR therapy VS conventional therapy were included. Meta-analysis was performed only when included RCTs ≥ 2 trials.

RESULTS

In total, 3 RCTs for endobronchial coils, 6 RCTs for endobronchial valves (EBV) and 2 RCTs for intrabronchial valves (IBV) were included. Compared with conventional therapy, endobronchial coils showed better response in minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) (RR = 2.37, 95% CI = 1.61 - 3.48, p < 0.0001), for 6-min walk test (6MWT) (RR = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.18 - 3.53, p = 0.01), and for St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (RR = 2.32, 95% CI = 1.77 - 3.03, p < 0.00001). EBV therapy also reached clinically significant improvement in FEV1 (RR = 2.96, 95% CI = 1.49 - 5.87, p = 0.002), in 6MWT (RR = 2.90, 95% CI = 1.24 - 6.79, p = 0.01), and in SGRQ (RR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.22 - 1.92, p = 0.0002). Both coils and EBV treatment achieved statistically significant absolute change in FEV1, 6MWT, and SGRQ from baseline, also accompanied by serious adverse effects. Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed there was no difference between homogeneous and heterogeneous emphysema in coils group. However, IBV group failed to show superior to conventional group.

CONCLUSIONS

Current meta-analysis indicates that coils or EBV treatment could significantly improve pulmonary function, exercise capacity, and quality of life compared with conventional therapy. Coils treatment could be applied in homogeneous emphysema, but further trials are needed.

Minimal important difference of target lobar volume reduction after endobronchial valve treatment for emphysema

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Target lobar volume reduction (TLVR) is an important efficacy outcome measure for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) treatment using one-way endobronchial valves (EBV) in patients with severe emphysema. The commonly used cut-off value for TLVR that expresses a perceivable clinical benefit is -350 mL. However, a scientifically determined minimal important difference (MID) for TLVR never has been published. The objective of the present study was to determine the MID for TLVR on HRCT in patients who were treated with EBV.

METHODS

A total of 318 patients with severe emphysema from two BLVR trials were analysed. Anchor-based methods were used to define the TLVR MID at 6 months follow-up. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁ ), residual volume (RV) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) were used as anchors.

RESULTS

The calculated TLVR MID with each anchor was: FEV₁ -587 mL, RV -534 mL and SGRQ -560 mL. The combined MID (average of the three anchor-based MIDs) was -563 mL.

CONCLUSION

Using the anchor-based method, we established a TLVR MID of -563 mL in patients with severe emphysema at 6 months follow-up after EBV treatment. This value can be useful for both interpreting the results from trials and clinical practice, as well as for designing future studies on lung volume reduction.

A new functional method to choose the target lobe for lung volume reduction in emphysema - comparison with the conventional densitometric method

Background

Lung volume reduction (LVR) improves breathing mechanics by reducing hyperinflation. Lobar selection usually focuses on choosing the most destroyed emphysematous lobes as seen on an inspiratory CT scan. However, it has never been shown to what extent these densitometric CT parameters predict the least deflation of an individual lobe during expiration. The addition of expiratory CT analysis allows measurement of the extent of lobar air trapping and could therefore provide additional functional information for choice of potential treatment targets.

Objectives

To determine lobar vital capacity/lobar total capacity (LVC/LTC) as a functional parameter for lobar air trapping using on an inspiratory and expiratory CT scan. To compare lobar selection by LVC/LTC with the established morphological CT density parameters.

Methods

36 patients referred for endoscopic LVR were studied. LVC/LTC, defined as delta volume over maximum volume of a lobe, was calculated using inspiratory and expiratory CT scans. The CT morphological parameters of mean lung density (MLD), low attenuation volume (LAV), and 15th percentile of Hounsfield units (15%P) were determined on an inspiratory CT scan for each lobe. We compared and correlated LVC/LTC with MLD, LAV, and 15%P.

Results

There was a weak correlation between the functional parameter LVC/LTC and all inspiratory densitometric parameters. Target lobe selection using lowest lobar deflation (lowest LVC/LTC) correlated with target lobe selection based on lowest MLD in 18 patients (50.0%), with the highest LAV in 13 patients (36.1%), and with the lowest 15%P in 12 patients (33.3%).

Conclusion

CT-based measurement of deflation (LVC/LTC) as a functional parameter correlates weakly with all densitometric CT parameters on a lobar level. Therefore, morphological criteria based on inspiratory CT densitometry partially reflect the deflation of particular lung lobes, and may be of limited value as a sole predictor for target lobe selection in LVR.

Patient experience of lung volume reduction procedures for emphysema: a qualitative service improvement project

The aim of this service improvement project was to gain understanding of the patient experience of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) and endobronchial valve (EBV) placement, from referral through to post-discharge care.

Focus group interviews were carried out in two tertiary centres in London and Leicester, UK. Sixteen patients who had undergone lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS), endobronchial valve (EBV) placement, or both, were recruited. Prior to participation in each focus group, participants completed a questionnaire to guide and focus discussion. Thematic analysis identified common themes to the participant experience of receiving lung volume reduction interventions.

Themes included patient focus on declining health and the need to “fight” for a referral; consequences of having procedures and potential unexpected complications; and vulnerability post discharge and limited continuity of care. Participants were clear that the benefits of having had either LVRS or EBV procedures outweighed any difficulties experienced. Participants were keen to have further similar interventions if appropriate.

These data confirm the need to develop more systematic lung volume reduction pathways, provide appropriate information, and ensure that post-discharge care is optimal.

Patients feel they have to fight to get a lung volume reduction procedure; a more systematic approach is neededhttp://ow.ly/82Oy30cLORk