Background: A variety of disease processes investigated by respiratory physicians can lead to cervical lymphadenopathy. Ultrasound (US) has revolutionised respiratory investigations, and neck ultrasound (NUS) is increasingly recognised as an additional important skill for respiratory physicians. Objectives: We aimed to assess the feasibility of NUS performed by respiratory physicians in the workup of patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy. Methods: This is a single-centre retrospective cohort study. All patients that underwent US-guided cervical lymph node sampling were included. The diagnostic yield is reported, and specimen adequacy is compared for respiratory physicians and radiologists. Results: Over 5 years, 106 patients underwent NUS-guided lymph node sampling by respiratory physicians compared to 35 cases performed by radiologists. There was no significant difference in the adequacy of sampling between the two groups (respiratory physicians 91.5% [95% CI 84.5–96%] compared to 82.9% [95% CI 66.4–93.4%] for radiologists [p = 0.2]). In the respiratory physician group, a diagnosis was achieved based on lymph node sampling in 89 cases (84%). Neck lymph node sampling was the only procedure performed to obtain tissue in 48 cases (45.3%). Conclusion: NUS and sampling performed by respiratory physicians are feasible and associated with an adequacy rate comparable to that of radiologists. It can reduce the number of invasive procedures performed in a selected group of patients. Guidelines for training and competency assessment are required.

This content is only available via PDF.
Open Access License / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes as well as any distribution of modified material requires written permission. 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.