SURVEILLANCE BRONCHOSCOPY IN LUNG-TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS

Citation
Ds. Kukafka et al., SURVEILLANCE BRONCHOSCOPY IN LUNG-TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS, Chest, 111(2), 1997, pp. 377-381
Citations number
26
Categorie Soggetti
Respiratory System
Journal title
ChestACNP
ISSN journal
00123692
Volume
111
Issue
2
Year of publication
1997
Pages
377 - 381
Database
ISI
SICI code
0012-3692(1997)111:2<377:SBILR>2.0.ZU;2-J
Abstract
Study objectives: To establish whether a consensus exists among active transplant centers regarding the use and interpretation of informatio n obtained by surveillance bronchoscopic lung biopsy (SBLB). Design: P rospective standardized questionnaire answered via mail and telephone communications. Participants: A five page, 18-question survey was sent to all lung transplant programs listed by the United Network of Organ Sharing in North America, as well as eight selected international pro grams. Ninety-one surveys were sent to 83 North American and eight int ernational programs. Seventy-four programs (81%) responded. Seventeen programs (19%) were excluded secondary to inactivity. The remaining 57 programs (63%) were included in final data analysis. Interventions: N one. Results: Sixty-eight percent (39/57) of the responding programs p et-form SBLBs. Ninety-two percent of the programs pet-forming SBLBs do so within the first month, and 69% continue to do so on a regular bas is. Sixty-nine percent (27/39) of programs performing SBLBs continue t o do so after 1 year. Eighty-six percent (32/37) of respondents believ e that SBLB impacts on patient management at least 10% of the time. Te chnically, 90% (35/39) take biopsy specimens from more than one lobe p er SBLB session. Fifty-nine percent (23/39) took 6 to 10 biopsy specim ens per session, 33% (13/39) took three to five biopsy specimens, and 7% (4/39) took >10 biopsy specimens per session. Eighty-six percent (3 2/37) of the responding centers reported treating asymptomatic rejecti on at grade 2A, while 14% (5/37) waited until histologic grade 3A befo re beginning treatment. Complications from SBLB were minimal with <5% rates of pneumothorax, requirement for chest tube placements, or signi ficant bleeding during SBLB reported by >95% of the programs pet-formi ng SBLB. Conclusion: Most active lung transplant centers perform SBLBs and do so on a regular basis. However, a wide range of opinion exists over the utility and technique of SBLB and the impact of its results influencing outcome in the lung transplant recipient. To answer these questions, a randomized multicentered trial or registry to determine t he effect of SBLB on lung transplant recipient morbidity and mortality is required.