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

Eligibility for Lung Volume Reduction Surgery in Patients With COPD Identified in a UK Primary Care Setting

BACKGROUND

Although lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) improves survival in appropriately selected patients with COPD, few procedures are performed. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended a more systematic approach to identifying potential candidates. We investigated LVRS referrals from a UK primary care population and aimed to establish an accurate estimate of eligible patients and determine a strategy for identifying potential candidates systematically.

METHODS

Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (a primary care database) and the linked Hospital Episode Statistics inpatient and Diagnostic Imaging Dataset were used. Patients with COPD who had undergone LVRS, patients who met basic eligibility criteria for further screening for LVRS, and patients meeting a more stringent eligibility criteria were identified from April 2012 to September 2015. Thoracic CT scan, pulmonary rehabilitation status, referral to respiratory outpatient clinics, and acute exacerbation of COPD requiring hospitalization were compared between actual LVRS recipients and potentially eligible patients.

RESULTS

Among the 73,697 patients with COPD included, 36 (0.05%) received LVRS, 5,984 (8.1%) met basic eligibility criteria, and 159 (0.2%) met more stringent eligibility criteria. LVRS recipients were younger (mean age ± SD, 64 ± 9.2 years) than the stringently eligible patients (mean age ± SD, 69 ± 8.9 years; P = .01). Few patients meeting stringent eligibility criteria (6.9%) had a CT scan of the thorax in the preceding 3 years or had been referred for assessment in secondary care.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial unmet need exists among patients with COPD who could potentially benefit from a lung volume reduction procedure but who are not being investigated or referred to consider this possibility.

Quantitative Evaluation of Lobar Pulmonary Function of Emphysema Patients with Endobronchial Coils

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in bronchoscopic lung volume reduction offer new therapies for patients with emphysema and hyperinflation. Pulmonary lobe segmentation with quantification of lobar volumes and emphysema severity plays a pivotal role in treatment planning and post-interventional assessment. Computed tomography (CT)-derived lobar volumes could reflect more accurate regional changes in pulmonary function.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study is to validate the reliability of an in-house CT Lung Segmentation software (LungSeg; the Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, UK) for lung lobar volume and emphysema quantification for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients.

METHODS

A total of 108 CT scans from subjects who participated in an endobronchial coil treatment trial were included. Lobar volume and emphysema quantification were performed using the LungSeg and Syngo CT Pulmo 3D package (Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Germany). The inter-user reliability of the LungSeg program was investigated. Correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses were used to quantify the inter-software variability. The agreement between CT volume analysis and plethysmography analysis was also examined.

RESULTS

The high intraclass correlation coefficients (mean ICC = 0.98) of the lobar volumes and emphysema indices measured by LungSeg suggest its excellent reproducibility. The LungSeg and Syngo program have good correlation (rho ≥0.94) and agreement for both lobar volume (median difference = 94 mL and LOAnp = 214.6 mL) and emphysema index (median difference ≤1.5% and LOAnp ≤2.03%) calculations. CT analysis provides a higher estimation of total lung capacity (TLCCT) than body plethysmography (TLCpleth), while there is a fair agreement on residual volume (RVCT) by LungSeg as compared with body plethysmography (RVpleth).

CONCLUSIONS

CT-derived lobar volume and emphysema quantification using the LungSeg program is efficient and reliable in allowing lobar volume assessment. LungSeg has low inter-user variability and agrees better with plethysmography for COPD assessment in our study.

Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction with Endobronchial Zephyr Valves for Severe Emphysema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic lung volume reduction using Zephyr® valves has been recently adopted as a treatment option for patients with severe emphysema without collateral ventilation (CV).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of Zephyr valves in such a population.

METHODS

Studies were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. All searches were current until June 2018. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of Zephyr. We defined as outcome: change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), in the 6-min walking test (6MWT), in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and in residual volume (RV). Safety analysis included relative risk (RR) of pneumothorax. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

RESULTS

7 RCTs reported on Zephyr valves and 5 RCTs included only patients without CV. Zephyr improved FEV1 with a mean difference (MD) of 17.36% (CI, 9.28-25.45, I2 = 78%). Subgroup analysis showed significant FEV1 improvement following Zephyr placement in patients with heterogeneous distribution: MD = 21.78% (CI, 8.70-34.86, I2 = 89%) and 16.27% (CI, 8.78-23.76, I2 = 0%) in patients with homogeneous emphysema. Studies with a follow-up of 3 months reported FEV1 MD = 17.19% (CI, 3.16-31.22, I2 = 89%) compared to studies with a follow-up of 6-12 months, which showed a consistent improvement of FEV1 MD = 17.90% (CI, 11.47-24.33, I2 = 0%). Zephyr also showed improvement of SGRQ, 6MWT, and RV. RR of pneumothorax was 6.32 (CI, 3.74-10.67, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

In this population, Zephyr valves provided significant and clinically meaningful short-term improvements in either homogeneous or heterogeneous emphysema without CV but with an increase in adverse events.

Role of Quantitative Computed Tomographic Scan Analysis in Lung Volume Reduction for Emphysema

Recent advances in bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) offer new therapeutic alternatives for patients with emphysema and hyperinflation. Endobronchial valves and coils are 2 potential BLVR techniques which have been shown to improve pulmonary function and the quality of life in patients with emphysema. Current patient selection for LVR procedures relies on 3 main inclusion criteria: low attenuation area (in %), also known as emphysema score, heterogeneity score, and fissure integrity score. Volumetric analysis in combination with densitometric analysis of the affected lung lobe or segment with quantitative CT to determine emphysema severity play an important role in treatment planning and post-operative assessment. Due to the variations in lung anatomy, manual corrections are often required to ensure successful and accurate lobe segmentation for pathological and post-treatment CT scan analysis. The advanced development and utilisation of quantitative CT do not simply represent regional changes in pulmonary function but aids in analysis for better patient selection with severe emphysema who are most likely to benefit from BLVR.

Endobronchial valves for severe emphysema

The results of the randomised controlled trials investigating the bronchoscopic lung volume reduction treatment using endobronchial valves (EBV) are promising, and have led to their inclusion in treatment guidelines, US Food and Drug Administration approval and inclusion in routine care in an increasing number of countries. The one-way valve treatment has advanced and is now a regular treatment option. However, this new phase will lead to new challenges in terms of implementation. We believe that key issues in future research concern advanced patient selection, improved methods for target lobe selection, increased knowledge on the predictive risk of a pneumothorax, positioning of pulmonary rehabilitation in conjunction with the EBV treatment, the positioning of lung volume reduction surgery versus EBV treatment, and the long-term efficacy, adverse events, impact on exacerbations and hospitalisations, costs and survival. Hopefully, the increasing number of patients treated, the setup of (inter)national registries and future research efforts will further optimise all aspects of this treatment.

[Imaging before and after endoscopic lung volume reduction]

The treatment of symptomatic lung emphysema by lung volume reduction has become established over the last 15 years. While surgical partial lung resection has profited from improved and less invasive surgical techniques, various endoscopic interventional procedures have been developed and are now available for use. All treatment approaches are dependent on individual anatomical variants and a regional distribution of the lung emphysema, which is why no procedure can be designated as the gold standard for all patients. High-resolution computed tomography can be qualitatively evaluated and provides decisive information for treatment, which is why radiologists play a particularly important role in treatment planning and aftercare of an intervention for reduction of the lung volume. This article presents the various endoscopic techniques, names the demands of the treating physician on the advising radiologist and finally describes how a treatment decision is derived from the results obtained.

Advances in Interventional Pulmonology

Much has changed since the last review of interventional pulmonology (IP) published in this Clinics series. The rate of development of new techniques and their complexities require IP physicians to be constantly maintaining and updating their skill set. International agreed training pathways help ensure that the interventionalists of the present and future have the required knowledge of anatomy, manual dexterity, and clinical judgment to keep up with the continuing advances that are constantly expanding IP's diagnostic and therapeutic boundaries. IP remains one of the most desirable subspecialities in pulmonology, and the technologic advances make the future an exciting one.

A Patient with GOLD Stage 3 COPD « cured » by One-Way Endobronchial Valves

Lung hyperinflation is a main determinant of dyspnoea in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Surgical or bronchoscopic lung volume reduction are the most efficient therapeutic approaches for reducing hyperinflation in selected patients with emphysema. We here report the case of a 69-year old woman with COPD (GOLD stage 3-D) referred for lung volume reduction. She complained of persistent disabling dyspnoea despite appropriate therapy. Chest imaging showed marked emphysema heterogeneity as well as severe hyperinflation of the right lower lobe. She was deemed to be a good candidate for bronchoscopic treatment with one-way endobronchial valves. In the absence of interlobar collateral ventilation, 2 endobronchial valves were placed in the right lower lobe under general anaesthesia. The improvement observed 1 and 3 months after the procedure was such that the patient no longer met the pulmonary function criteria for COPD. The benefit persisted after 3 years.

The OncoAge Consortium: Linking Aging and Oncology from Bench to Bedside and Back Again

It is generally accepted that carcinogenesis and aging are two biological processes, which are known to be associated. Notably, the frequency of certain cancers (including lung cancer), increases significantly with the age of patients and there is now a wealth of data showing that multiple mechanisms leading to malignant transformation and to aging are interconnected, defining the so-called common biology of aging and cancer. OncoAge, a consortium launched in 2015, brings together the multidisciplinary expertise of leading public hospital services and academic laboratories to foster the transfer of scientific knowledge rapidly acquired in the fields of cancer biology and aging into innovative medical practice and silver economy development. This is achieved through the development of shared technical platforms (for research on genome stability, (epi)genetics, biobanking, immunology, metabolism, and artificial intelligence), clinical research projects, clinical trials, and education. OncoAge focuses mainly on two pilot pathologies, which benefit from the expertise of several members, namely lung and head and neck cancers. This review outlines the broad strategic directions and key advances of OncoAge and summarizes some of the issues faced by this consortium, as well as the short- and long-term perspectives.

Predictors of Response to Endobronchial Coil Therapy in Patients With Advanced Emphysema

BACKGROUND

The Lung Volume Reduction Coil Treatment in Patients With Emphysema (RENEW) trial reported improvements in quality of life, pulmonary function, and exercise performance following endobronchial coil treatment.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this post hoc analysis was to identify baseline predictors, including quantitative CT measures, that identify patients most likely to significantly benefit from endobronchial coil therapy.

METHODS

Quantitative CT analysis by an independent radiology laboratory and a qualitative evaluation by five blinded experts of the baseline thoracic CT imaging were performed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to elucidate characteristics associated with clinical response.

RESULTS

In total, 125 patients underwent coil treatment and had evaluable 12-month follow-up results. Of these, 78 patients received treatment of lobes with the highest emphysematous destruction determined by quantitative CT analysis (quantitative visual match [QVM]+), and 47 received treatment in at least one lobe that was not the most destroyed (QVM-). From the 78 patients with QVM+ treatment, a subgroup of 50 patients (64%) was identified with baseline residual volume > 200% predicted, emphysema score > 20% low attenuation area, and absence of airway disease. In this subgroup, greater lobar residual volume reduction in the treated lobes was achieved, which was associated with significant mean ± SE improvement in FEV₁ (15.2 ± 3.1%), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (-12 ± 2 points), and residual volume (-0.57 ± 0.13 L).

DISCUSSION

This post hoc analysis found that both significant hyperinflation (residual volume ≥ 200% predicted) and CT analysis are critical for patient selection and treatment planning for endobronchial coil therapy. Quantitative CT analysis is important to identify optimal lobar treatment and to exclude patients with insufficient emphysema (< 20% low attenuation area), whereas visual assessment identifies patients with signs of airway disease associated with worse outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01608490; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Surgical and endoscopic interventions that reduce lung volume for emphysema: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe emphysema is a debilitating condition with few treatment options. Lung volume reduction procedures in the treatment of severe emphysema have shown excellent results in selected patients but their exact role remains unclear with studies reporting a wide variation in outcomes. We therefore aimed to evaluate the effects of volume reduction.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE on Sept 29, 2016, for trials of lung volume reduction in patients with emphysema, and we did an updated search on Embase and PubMed on June 18, 2018. We only included randomised controlled studies published in English evaluating the intervention with either sham or standard of care. Inclusion was limited to trials of techniques in which there was sustainable volume reduction. Primary outcomes were residual volume, FEV₁, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and 6-min walk distance (6MWT). Secondary outcomes were severe adverse events (including mortality), short-term mortality, and overall mortality. We extracted summary level data from the trial publications and where necessary we obtained unpublished data. A random-effects model with the I² statistic was used to determine heterogeneity and trial weight in each analysis. The study is registered with the PROSPERO database, number CRD42016045705.

FINDINGS

We identified 4747 references in the search, and included 20 randomised controlled trials of lung volume reduction involving 2794 participants with emphysema. Following lung volume reduction from any of the interventions in pooled analyses (ie, surgery, endobronchial valve, endobronchial coil, or sclerosing agents), the mean differences compared with the control were reduction in residual volume of 0·58 L (95% CI -0·80 to -0·37), increase in FEV₁ of 15·87% (95% CI 12·27 to 19·47), improvement in 6MWT of 43·28 m (31·36 to 55·21), and reduction in the SGRQ of 9·39 points (-10·92 to -7·86). The odds ratio for a severe adverse event, which included mortality, was 6·21 (95% CI 4·02 to 9·58) following intervention. Regression analysis showed improvements relative to the degree of volume reduction: FEV₁ (r²=0·86; p<0·0001), 6MWT (r²=0·77; p<0·0001), and SGRQ (r²=0·70; p<0·0001). Most studies were at high risk of bias for lack of blinding, and heterogeneity was high for some outcomes when pooled across all interventions, but was generally lower in the subgroups by intervention type.

INTERPRETATION

Despite limitations of high risk of bias and heterogeneity for some analyses, our results provide support that lung volume reduction in patients with severe emphysema on maximal medical treatment has clinically meaningful benefits. These benefits should be considered alongside potential adverse events.

FUNDING

None.

Efficacy and Safety of Stent, Valves, Vapour ablation, Coils and Sealant Therapies in Advanced Emphysema: A Meta-Analysis

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) methods have emerged as a new treatment option for patients with severe emphysema. Endobronchial valves and coils have been extensively studied. This review assesses efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of the BLVR procedures (stent, valves, vapor ablation, endobronchial coils, lung sealant) in patients with severe emphysema. Databases were searched until October 2016, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing available BLVR procedures to standard medical care or sham bronchoscopy were included. Random effect model and generic inverse variance approach were used for meta-analysis. Out of 381 identified records, 16 RCTs were included. As compared to recommended medical care or sham bronchoscopy, the BLVR procedures are more effective in improving quality of life [SGRQ score (WMD=-6.38; -9.12 to -3.65)] and 6MWT (WMD=24.21; 9.68-38.74) and percentage FEV₁ (WMD=10.48; 7.07-13.89). Increased risk of serious adverse events (RR=2.18; 1.63-2.93), specifically for chronic pulmonary obstructive disease exacerbations and lower respiratory tract infection combined (RR=1.37; 1.07-1.75), were observed with bronchoscopic interventions, while there was no difference in number of deaths (RR=1.25; 0.79-1.99) and respiratory failure (RR=1.13; 0.57-2.21). The BLVR procedures, especially endobronchial coils, were found to be effective in the management of patients with severe emphysema irrespective of collateral ventilation. However, characterization of patients who would be most benefited from these procedures is required, and effectiveness of these procedures in long run needs to be established.

Long-term follow up after endoscopic valve therapy in patients with severe emphysema

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic valve therapy is a treatment modality in patients with advanced emphysema and absent interlobar collateral ventilation (CV). So far, long-term outcome following valve implantation has been insufficiently evaluated. The aim of this study was to investigate the real-world efficacy of this interventional therapy over 3 years.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2013, 256 patients with severe emphysema in whom absent CV was confirmed underwent valve therapy. The 3-year effectiveness was evaluated by pulmonary function testing (VC, FEV1, RV, TLC), 6-minute-walk test (6-MWT) and dyspnea questionnaire (mMRC). Long-term outcome was also assessed according to the radiological outcome following valve placement.

RESULTS

Of 256 patients treated with valves, 220, 200, 187, 100 and 66 patients completed the 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year and 3-year follow-up (FU) visit, respectively. All lung function parameters, 6-MWT and mMRC were significantly improved at 3- and 6-month FU. At 1-year FU, patients still experienced a significant improvement of all outcome parameters expect VC (L) and TLC (%). At 2 years, RV (L and %) and TLC (L and %) remained significantly improved compared to baseline. Three years after valve therapy, sustained significant improvement in mMRC was observed and the proportion of patients achieving a minimal clinically important difference from baseline in RV and 6-MWT was still 71% and 46%, respectively. Overall, patients with complete lobar atelectasis exhibited superior treatment outcome with 3-year responder rates to FEV1, RV and 6-MWT of 10%, 79% and 53%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated by valves experienced clinical improvement over 1 year following valve therapy. Afterwards, clinical benefit gradually declines more likely due to COPD progression.

The REACH Trial: A Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing the Safety and Effectiveness of the Spiration® Valve System in the Treatment of Severe Emphysema

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has become a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in China, with tobacco smoke, air pollution, and occupational biohazards being the major risk factors.

OBJECTIVES

The REACH trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial undertaken in China to assess the safety and effectiveness of the Spiration® Valve System (SVS) compared to standard medical care in COPD patients with severe emphysema.

METHODS

Patients with severe airflow obstruction, hyperinflation, and severe dyspnea with interlobar fissure integrity were evaluated for enrollment. A total of 107 subjects were randomized in a 2: 1 allocation ratio to either the treatment group (SVS valves and medical management) or the control group (medical management alone).

RESULTS

The 3-month primary endpoint showed statistically significant improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 s in the treatment group compared to the control group (0.104 ± 0.18 vs. 0.003 ± 0.15 L, p = 0.001), with the difference being durable through 6 months. Statistically significant target lobe volume reduction was achieved at 3 months (mean change 684.4 ± 686.7 mL) and through 6 months (757.0 ± 665.3 mL). Exercise function and quality of life measures improved in the treatment group, but showed a deterioration in the control group. The serious adverse event (SAE) rate was 33% in the treatment group and 24.2% in the control group. The predominance of SAEs were acute exacerbations of COPD in both groups. There was 1 death in the control group and no deaths in the treatment group.

CONCLUSION

The SVS represents a novel approach for the treatment of severe emphysema with a clinically acceptable risk-benefit profile.

Patient Preferences for Endobronchial Valve Treatment of Severe Emphysema

Background: Patients with severe emphysema have limited treatment options. Little is known about patients' willingness to accept risks for new treatments that offer meaningful benefits. Methods: We determined treatment preferences of patients with severe emphysema using a web-based discrete-choice experiment survey. Respondents answered 9 questions that offered choices between 2 hypothetical interventional treatments or continuing current medical management. Variations in 5 attributes defined the 2 interventional treatments: improvement in ability to breathe and carry out day-to-day activities, frequency of hospitalized exacerbations, treatment type, risk of pneumothorax within 30 days of procedure, and risk of death within 3 months. Respondents were recruited through the COPD Foundation's COPD Patient-Powered Research Network and had a self-reported emphysema diagnosis and 2+ score on the modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale. The relative importance of the attributes and the percentage of respondents who would select different treatment options was modeled using random-parameters logit. Results: Among 294 respondents, 51% always chose an interventional treatment option, while 19% always selected continued medical management. The most important change on average was moving from continued medical management (with no improvement in breathlessness) to an interventional treatment with improvement in breathlessness. The model predicted 71% of respondents would select a treatment option similar to removable endobronchial valve implants, 6% would select lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS), and 23% continued medical management. Conclusion: Patients with severe emphysema perceive that a procedure with risks and benefits similar to the Zephyr^® endobronchial valve implants is desirable over continued medical management or LVRS.

Competence in bronchoscopic treatments in emphysema

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) has been proven to be effective in patients with severe emphysema. These techniques are divided into two groups: non-blocking devices that are independent of collateral ventilation and blocking devices that are dependent on collateral ventilation so the choice of the target lobe with inadequate scissors is crucial for the success of the treatment. Current evidences suggest that not all classes and phenotypes of emphysema will benefit from BLVR, and that each technique appears to provide a greater benefit to specific sub-groups of patients. Careful patient selection is imperative to prevent insertion in patients unlikely to gain clinical benefits as well as wasteful expenditure. The Chartis system represents the gold standard for measuring fissure integrity and is a direct measurement method. Indirect method is instead the TC study which, thanks to the development of software for quantitative analysis, allows us to obtain reliable measurements of regional density of parenchyma, airway thickness and scissor integrity. BLVR is a highly complex procedure: a first-level competence is a pre-requisite for admission to training. The practical training must be based on discussion of clinical cases and the insertion techniques of the different devices on plastic or animal models, or on cadavers. A specific course, offering final certification, has been developed on the use of Zephyr valves.

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.

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.

Surgical and endoscopic treatment for COPD: patients selection, techniques and results

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a very heterogeneous disease characterised by an obstructive lung pattern that constitutes worldwide a major cause of high morbidity and mortality. In the last decades, lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has demonstrated to be a potential good alternative to transplantation in patients affected by COPD. The trend toward minimally invasive techniques resulted not only in surgical procedures better tolerated by the patients but also in several endoscopic treatments modality that are rapidly gaining ground.

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.

Clinical management of lung volume reduction in end stage emphysema patients

Following the evaluation of surgical lung volume reduction (LVR) in the National Emphysema Treatment (NETT) trial, different endoscopic LVR procedures have been developed for severe emphysema. Among those, endobronchial valve placement is the best evaluated method. All these therapies aim at reducing hyperinflation and at improving respiratory mechanics. It has been shown that these procedures can improve quality of life, lung function and exercise capacity in a significant and clinically meaningful way in suitable patients. Optimal medical therapy, physical rehabilitation, smoking cessation and respiratory insufficiency assessments should been thoroughly evaluated by a multi-disciplinary team before considering any LVR procedure. Clinical experience is necessary to decide if a patient is an appropriate candidate for a surgical or an interventional LVR procedure, to choose the optimal treatment strategy and to provide a high-level of care after the intervention, particularly when complications such as pneumothorax or persistent air leak occur in this already severely ill patient population. High volume emphysema care centers, providing a broad spectrum of different LVR procedures and involving a multidisciplinary team in the diagnostic process, are best suited to provide an optimal outcome. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the structures and procedures required to achieve the best possible outcome even in patients with advanced stage of their emphysema disease, including patients who are candidates for lung transplantation.

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.

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.

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.

Lung volume reduction with endobronchial coils for patients with emphysema

The lung volume reduction coil treatment is a minimally invasive bronchoscopic treatment option for emphysema patients who suffer from severe hyperinflation. The treatment is aimed at a large group of patients where lung volume reduction surgery and bronchoscopic lung volume reduction using endobronchial valves are no option, or alternatively, can be offered as a bridge to lung transplantation. The nitinol coil exhibits a shape memory effect and is biologically inert. The lung volume reduction coil procedure is performed in two separate treatment sessions, targeting one lobe per session, with the contralateral lobe being treated 4 to 8 weeks after the first session. In one treatment session, around 10 to 14 coils, thereby treating an entire lobe, are being placed. Selecting optimally treated, symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with emphysema and severe hyperinflation, while avoiding significant airway disease such as asthma, chronic bronchitis and bronchiectasis, is key to achieve treatment success. Three randomized clinical trials investigating lung volume reduction coil treatment have been published until now, reporting the results of 452 treated patients up to 12 months after coil treatment. Lung volume reduction coil treatment results in significant improvement of pulmonary function outcomes and quality of life in patients with severe hyperinflation. The most common complications of lung volume reduction coil treatment are: COPD exacerbations, pneumonia, Coil Associated Opacity and an increased risk of pneumothorax. The purpose of this article is to describe the coil technique and review the available literature regarding effect, safety and future perspectives of lung volume reduction with coils for emphysema patients.

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.

Review of Recent Important Papers in Interventional Pulmonology

Interventional pulmonology is an innovative branch of pulmonary medicine that uses minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to airway, parenchymal, and pleural disease. The author reviews recent high-impact trials including randomized trials describing the use of endobronchial coils and valves in the management of severe emphysema. Novel approaches to the palliation of malignant and benign pleural effusion including increasing the frequency of drainage and instillation of talc via tunneled pleural catheters are also presented. In addition, a recent consensus paper discussing the optimal use and technique of cryobiopsy in diffuse parenchymal disease is reviewed, as well as a systematic review and meta-analysis of its diagnostic yield. The final trial reviewed in this article describes the preliminary safety and efficacy study of a novel endobronchial, balloon, and injection catheter for the local administration of chemotherapy into the airway mucosa so as to minimize the systemic absorption of these agents.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of endobronchial valve treatment in patients with severe emphysema compared to standard medical care

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction using endobronchial valves (EBV) is an effective new treatment option for severe emphysema patients without interlobar collateral ventilation. The objective of this study was to perform an economic evaluation including the costs and cost-effectiveness of EBV treatment compared with standard medical care (SoC) from the hospital perspective in the short term and long term.

METHODS

For the short-term evaluation, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated based on the 6-month end point data from the STELVIO randomized trial. For the long-term evaluation, a Markov simulation model was constructed based on STELVIO and literature. The clinical outcome data were quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) based on the EuroQol5-Dimensions (EQ5D) questionnaire, the 6-min walking distance (6MWD) and the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ).

RESULTS

The mean difference between the EBV group and controls was €16 721/patient. In the short-term (6 months), costs per additional QALY was €205 129, the ICER for 6MWD was €160 and for SGRQ was €1241. In the long term, the resulting cost-effectiveness ratios indicate additional costs of €39 000 per QALY gained with a 5-year time horizon and €21 500 per QALY gained at 10 years. In comparison, historical costs per additional QALY 1 year after the coil treatment are €738 400, 5 years after lung volume reduction surgery are €48 415 and 15 years after double-lung transplantation are €29 410.

CONCLUSION

The positive clinical effects of EBV treatment are associated with increased costs compared with SoC. Our results suggest that the EBV treatment has a favourable cost-effectiveness profile, also when compared with other treatment modalities for this patient group.

[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.