Background: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is an accurate procedure to sample mediastinal tissue. Rapid on-site cytologic evaluation (ROSE) has been advocated to improve the performance of this procedure, but its benefit remains controversial. Our objective is to assess the utility of ROSE for EBUS-TBNA diagnostic accuracy among unselected patients. Methods: We prospectively collected data from all consecutive EBUS-TBNA procedures performed between 2008 and 2014. ROSE was introduced since 2011 in our daily practice. The accuracy of EBUS-TBNA with and without ROSE was compared in a univariate and multivariate model accounting for confounding factors. The impact of ROSE was then analyzed according to the etiology and size of the lesions. Results: Among 348 EBUS-TBNA procedures analyzed, 213 were performed with ROSE. The overall accuracy tended to be better with ROSE than without (90.6 vs. 84.4%; p = 0.082). After adjustment in a multivariate model, the benefit of ROSE still did not reach statistical significance (adjusted odds ratio 1.86; 95% confidence interval 0.79–4.41). Similar results were obtained in subgroups of patients with malignant disease or sarcoidosis. The size of the lesion did not influence the impact of ROSE on accuracy. Conclusions: ROSE was associated with a moderate increase in the accuracy of EBUS-TBNA, but the difference was not statistically significant. The same effect of ROSE was observed in malignant and nonmalignant lesions and this effect was not influenced by the lesion’s size.

Keywords:
Bronchoscopy, Endobronchial ultrasound, Transbronchial needle aspiration, Rapid on-site evaluation
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.