Patient Preferences for Endobronchial Valve Treatment of Severe Emphysema

Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction as the Treatment of Choice versus Robotic-Assisted Lung Volume Reduction Surgery in Similar Patients with Emphysema - An Initial Experience of the Benefits and Complications

Objective

There is an assumption that because EBLVR requires less use of hospital resources, offsetting the higher cost of endobronchial valves, it should therefore be the treatment of choice wherever possible. We have tested this hypothesis in a retrospective analysis of the two in similar groups of patients.

Methods

In a 4-year experience, we performed 177 consecutive LVR procedures: 83 patients underwent Robot Assisted Thoracoscopic (RATS) LVRS and 94 EBLVR. EBLVR was intentionally precluded by evidence of incomplete fissure integrity or intra-operative assessment of collateral ventilation. Unilateral RATS LVRS was performed in these cases together with those with unsuitable targets for EBLVR.

Results

EBLVR was uncomplicated in 37 (39%) cases; complicated by post-procedure spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) in 28(30%) and required revision in 29 (31%). In the LVRS group, 7 (8%) patients were readmitted with treatment-related complications, but no revisional procedure was needed. When compared with uncomplicated EBLVR, LVRS had a significantly longer operating time: 85 (14-82) vs 40 (15-151) minutes (p<0.001) and hospital stay: 7.5 (2-80) vs 2 (1-14) days (p<0.01). However, LVRS had a similar total operating time to both EBLVR requiring revision: 78 (38-292) minutes and hospital stay to EBLVR complicated by pneumothorax of 11.5 (6.5-24.25) days. Use of critical care was significantly longer in RATS group, and it was also significantly longer in EBV with SP group than in uncomplicated EBV group.

Conclusion

Endobronchial LVR does use less hospital resources than RATS LVRS in comparable groups if the recovery is uncomplicated. However, this advantage is lost if one includes the resources needed for the treatment of complications and revisional procedures. Any decision to favour EBLVR over LVRS should not be based on the assumption of a smoother, faster perioperative course.

Improving Referral Patterns for Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction: A Quality Improvement Initiative

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) is a minimally invasive treatment option for patients with severe emphysema and hyperinflation refractory to optimal medical care. This therapy is effective in improving functional status and quality of life, underscoring the importance of identifying potential procedure candidates. To our knowledge, scalable strategies to improve the referral of advanced lung disease patients are lacking. This quality improvement project aimed to increase identification and referral for BLVR in a large Veterans Affairs academic medical center. We show implementing case identification within a pulmonary function testing report, in conjunction with provider education, increased referral rates for BLVR. Because of the ubiquity of lung function testing, other advanced lung disease programs may consider adopting this strategy to improve patients' access to timely clinical evaluation and therapy.

Surgical and Interventional Approaches in COPD

Many patients suffer from complaints of dyspnea, cough, and sputum production, clinical symptoms that hallmark the structural abnormalities that are present in patients with COPD. Although pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic medical therapies help reduce these symptoms, many of these symptoms, especially dyspnea, remain unchecked and contribute to the burden of disease in patients with COPD. Over the last 3 decades, several surgical and interventional treatments delivered via a bronchoscopic approach have been developed to complement medical therapies and show promise to improve patient outcomes. Surgical and interventional treatments target structural abnormalities of the airway and lung parenchyma that can be identified with a combination of imaging and physiological testing, factors that are key to select patients most likely to benefit from these treatments. This paper reviews surgical and bronchoscopic interventional treatment options for patients with emphysema and airways disorders.

Endobronchial Valves for the Treatment of Advanced Emphysema

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with one-way endobronchial valves is a guideline treatment option for patients with advanced emphysema that is supported by extensive scientific data. Patients limited by severe hyperinflation, with a suitable emphysema treatment target lobe and with absence of collateral ventilation, are the responders to this treatment. Detailed patient selection, a professional treatment performance, and dedicated follow up of the valve treatment, including management of complications, are key ingredients to success. This treatment does not stand alone; it especially requires extensive knowledge of COPD for which the most appropriate treatment is discussed in a multidisciplinary approach. We discuss the endobronchial valve treatment for emphysema and provide a guideline for patient selection, treatment guidance, and practice tools, based on our own experience and literature.

Endobronchial valve vs coil for lung volume reduction in emphysema: results from a tertiary care centre in Turkey

BACKGROUND

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) by either the endobronchial valve (EBV) or coil (EBC) procedure is recommended for severe emphysematous patients. BLVR applications generally help healthy lung areas ventilate more comfortably by reducing the hyperinflation and improving the contraction capacity of diaphragm.

OBJECTIVES

Compare our experience with valve and coil BLVR devices.

DESIGN

Retrospective.

SETTING

Single tertiary care centre.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Demographic data, vital signs, pulmonary function tests (PFTs), the six-minute walking test (6MWT), vital signs, arterial blood gases and complications were recorded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change in PFTs and completion of the 6MWT.

SAMPLE SIZE

60 Turkish men with a diagnosis of chronic pulmonary lung disease.

RESULTS

Clinical and demographic characteristics were similar in patients who underwent EBV and EBC. Thirty (96.8%) EBV patients and 27 (93.1%) of the EBC patients were able to properly complete the PFT before the procedures, but all complied after the procedures. Significant improvement in PFTs were achieved after the procedure and there were no statistically significant differences in post-procedure performance. For the 6MWT, the completion rate improved from 15 (48.4%) to 19 (61.3%) patients in the EBV patients (P=.125) and from 19 (65.5%) to 21 (72.4%) patients in the EBC patients (P=.500). There was no significant difference in completion rates for the walking test for either group (median 32 meters in EBV patients and 37 meters in EBC patients; P=.652). Vital signs and arterial blood gases were similar in the two groups. The rates of complications were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Endobronchial valves and coils are safe and effective methods for BLVR for patients with severe emphysema.

LIMITATIONS

Relatively small sample, retrospective design, single-centre retrospective study.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.