Guidelines on analgosedation, monitoring, and recovery time for flexible bronchoscopy: a systematic review

Spray nozzle for topical anaesthesia during flexible bronchoscopy: a randomised controlled trial

Background

The effectiveness of using a spray nozzle to deliver lidocaine for superior topical airway anaesthesia during non-sedation flexible bronchoscopy (FB) remains a topic of uncertainty when compared with conventional methods.

Methods

Patients referred for FB were randomly assigned to receive topical lidocaine anaesthesia via the bronchoscope's working channel (classical spray (CS) group) or through a washing pipe equipped with a spray nozzle (SN group). The primary outcome was cough rate, defined as the total number of coughs per minute. Secondary outcomes included subjective perceptions of both the patient and operator regarding the FB process. These perceptions were rated on a visual analogue scale, with numerical ratings ranging from 0 to 10.

Results

Our study enrolled a total of 126 (61 CS group; 65 SN group) patients. The SN group exhibited a significantly lower median cough rate compared with the CS group (4.5 versus 7.1 counts·min-1; p=0.021). Patients in the SN group also reported less oropharyngeal discomfort (4.5±2.7 versus 5.6±2.9; p=0.039), better tolerance of the procedure (6.8±2.2 versus 5.7±2.7; p=0.011) and a greater willingness to undergo a repeat FB procedure (7.2±2.7 versus 5.8±3.4; p=0.015) compared with those in the CS group. From the operator's perspective, patient discomfort (2.7±1.7 versus 3.4±2.3; p=0.040) and cough scores (2.3±1.5 versus 3.2±2.4; p=0.013) were lower in the SN group compared with the CS group, with less disruption due to coughing observed among those in the SN group (1.6±1.4 versus 2.3±2.3; p=0.029).

Conclusions

This study illustrates that employing a spray nozzle for the delivery of lidocaine provides superior topical airway anaesthesia during non-sedation FB compared with the traditional method.

Efficacy and Safety of Chinese Medicine Resuscitation Pack for Enhanced Recovery after Bronchoscopy: A Randomized, Single-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a hospital-made resuscitation pack, a Chinese medicinal herbal compound formula designed to enhance recovery in post-bronchoscopy patients.

METHODS

In this randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to either the treatment or control groups. The patients in the treatment group applied the resuscitation pack, which contained aromatic compounded Chinese herbs. The patients in the control group applied a hospital-made, single herb placebo pack. Packs were placed on the Tiantu (CV 22) acupuncture point for 4 h as soon as the bronchoscopy finished. Efficacy indicators, such as recovery time, patients' symptoms including nausea and dizziness, and adverse events (AEs) were observed and compared. The outcome indices were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 24 h after the bronchoscopy. Subgroup analysis was further performed by patients' age and depth of sedation.

RESULTS

When applying generalized estimating equations (GEE) to evaluate the intensity of post-bronchoscopy nausea and vomiting, the intensity was lower in the treatment group (163 cases) compared with the control group (162 cases; 95% CI: 0.004, 0.099, P=0.03]. Also, significantly lower intensity of nausea was observed in the 60-70 years of age subgroup (95% CI: 0.029, 0.169, P=0.006) and deep sedation subgroup (95% CI: 0.002, 0.124; P=0.04). There was no significant difference in dizziness between two groups by GEE (95% CI: -0.134, 0.297; P=0.459). In addition, no serious AEs were observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that the resuscitation pack markedly improved patients' symptoms by reducing nausea and vomiting after bronchoscopy without AEs, compared with placebo in the perioperative period. (Trial registration No. ChiCTR2000038299).

Efficacy of different respiratory supports to prevent hypoxia during flexible bronchoscopy in patients of COPD: a triple-arm, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic-obstructive-pulmonary-disease (COPD) undergo bronchoscopy for various reasons, and are at relatively higher risk of complications. This study evaluated the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow-oxygen-therapy (HFOT) compared with conventional-oxygen-therapy (COT) in patients with COPD undergoing bronchoscopy, to prevent hypoxia.

METHODS

It was a triple-arm, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Ninety patients with COPD were randomly assigned into three intervention arms in 1:1:1 ratio. The incidence of hypoxia, lowest recorded oxygen saturation measured by plethysmography (SpO2), ECG, patient vitals and comfort levels were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean age of the study population was 61.71±7.5 years. Out of 90 cases enrolled, 51, 34 and 5 were moderate, severe and very-severe COPD, respectively, as per GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) classification. Rest of the baseline characteristics were similar. SpO2 during flexible bronchoscopy (FB) was lowest in COT group (COT: 87.03±5.7% vs HFOT: 95.57±5.0% vs NIV: 97.40±1.6%, p<0.001). Secondary objectives were similar except respiratory-rate (breaths-per-minute) which was highest in COT group (COT: 20.23±3.1 vs HFOT: 18.57±4.1 vs NIV: 16.80±1.9, p<0.001). Whereas post FB partial of oxygen in arterial blood was highest in NIV group (NIV: 84.27±21.6 mm Hg vs HFOT: 69.03±13.6 mm Hg vs COT: 69.30±11.9 mm Hg, p<0.001). Post FB partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood was similar in the three arms. Operator's ease-of-performing-procedure was least in the NIV group as assessed with Visual Analogue Scale (p<0.01). A higher number of NIV group participants reported nasal pain as compared with the other two arms (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

NIV and HFOT are superior to COT in preventing hypoxia during bronchoscopy, but NIV is associated with poor patient-tolerance and inferior operator's ease of doing procedure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTRI/2021/03/032190.

May noninvasive mechanical ventilation and/ or continuous positive airway pressure increase the bronchoalveolar lavage salvage in patients with pulmonary diseases? Randomized clinical trial - Study protocol

PURPOSE

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) procedure is a useful tool in the diagnosis of patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) and is helpful in clinical research of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Still little is known about predictors of poor BAL salvage. The trial aims to find the most efficient way to improve BAL recovery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Our study is a prospective, multicenter, international, two-arm randomized controlled trial. We aim to obtain BAL samples from a total number of 300 patients: 150 with ILD and 150 with COPD to achieve a statistical power of 80 ​%. Patients with initial BAL salvage <60 ​% will be randomized into the non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) arm. The NIV and CPAP will be set according to the study protocol. The influence on BAL salvage will be assessed in terms of BAL volume and content. Multivariable analysis of the additional test results to determine predictors for low BAL recovery will be conducted. In a study subgroup of approximately 20 patients per specific disease, a metabolomic assessment of exhaled air condensate will be performed. All procedures will be assessed in terms of the patient's safety. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID# NCT05631132). Interested experienced centers are invited to join the research group by writing to the corresponding author.

CONCLUSION

The results of our prospective study will address the currently unsolved problem of how to increase BAL salvage in patients with pulmonary diseases without increasing the risk of respiratory failure exacerbation.

The use of non-invasive respiratory assistance to facilitate bronchofiberoscopy performance in patients with hypoxemic (type one) respiratory failure - Study protocol

PURPOSE

Bronchofiberoscopy (FOB) is a procedure routinely performed for: lung cancer, obstruction, interstitial diseases, foreign bodies' removal, airway clearance, and hemoptysis. It causes acute airway narrowing leading to respiratory and cardiovascular stress. Due to increasing number of ill patients with respiratory failure (RF), conventional oxygen therapy (COT) is frequently insufficient to assure accurate oxygenation and prevent RF in patients requiring FOB. In this clinical scenario, patients may be intubated and supported with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with the specific aim of allowing a safe FOB. However, this invasive strategy is associated with an increased risk of IMV-associated complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our study is a planned prospective multicenter three-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT). The target number of 300 patients was calculated based on the intubation risk in RF patients, which is 0.2-2%. The patients will be assigned to each arm based on Horowitz index. In each arm, the patients will be randomly assigned to one out of two dedicated respiratory support methods in each group i.e. COT/high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), HFNC/non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and NIV/IMV. In the manuscript the current state of art in the area of respiratory support is discussed. We have underlined knowledge gaps in medical evidence which we are planning to reveal with our results.

RESULTS

The results of our study are clinically crucial, because they address current gaps concerning COT/HFNC/NIV/IMV.

CONCLUSION

The expected findings of this study would allow for careful selection of respiratory support method to safely perform FOB in patients with hypoxemic RF.

Evaluating efficacy and safety of sub-anesthetic dose esketamine as an adjuvant to propofol/remifentanil analgosedation and spontaneous respiration for children flexible fibreoptic bronchoscopy: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, and placebo-controlled clinical trial

Background: Flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB) for children is widely performed under sedation. Currently, the optimal sedation regimen remains unclear. Esketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor antagonist, which has stronger sedative and analgesic effects and exerts less cardiorespiratory depression than other sedatives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a subanesthetic dose of esketamine as an adjuvant to propofol/remifentanil and spontaneous ventilation compared with control reduces the procedural and anesthesia-related complications of FFB in children. Materials and methods: Seventy-two children ≤ 12 years of age who were scheduled for FFB were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to the esketamine-propofol/remifentanil (Group S, n = 36) or to the propofol/remifentanil group (Group C, n = 36). All children were retained spontaneous ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of oxygen desaturation (respiratory depression). Perioperative hemodynamic variables, blood oxygen saturation (SPO₂), end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PetCO₂), respiratory rate (R), and the Bispectral index (BIS), induction time, procedural time, recovery time, the time to the ward from the recovery room, consumption of propofol and remifentanil during the procedure and the appearance of adverse events, including paradoxical agitation following midazolam administration, injection pain, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, PONV, vertigo, and hallucination were also compared. Results: The incidence of oxygen desaturation was significantly lower in Group S (8.3%) compared to Group C (36.1%, p = 0.005). The perioperative hemodynamic profile including SBP, DBP, and HR were more stable in Group S than that in Group C (p < 0.05). Consumption of propofol and remifentanil was lower in Group S than in Group C (p < 0.05). Furthermore, PAED scores, cough scores and injection pain were lower in the Group S than in Group C (p < 0.05). The recovery time of Group S was slightly longer than that of Group C (p < 0.05). Nobody happened paradoxical agitation following midazolam administration, PONV, vertigo, and hallucinations in both groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Our findings indicate that a subanesthetic dose of esketamine as an adjuvant to propofol/remifentanil and spontaneous respiration is an effective regimen for children undergoing FFB. Our findings will provide a reference for clinical sedation practice during these procedures in children. Clinical Trail Registration: Chinese clinicaltrials.gov registry (identifier: ChiCTR2100053302).

Research Bronchoscopies in Critically Ill Research Participants: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report

Bronchoscopy for research purposes is a valuable tool to understand lung-specific biology in human participants. Despite published reports and active research protocols using this procedure in critically ill patients, no recent document encapsulates the important safety considerations and downstream applications of this procedure in this setting. The objectives were to identify safe practices for patient selection and protection of hospital staff, provide recommendations for sample procurement to standardize studies, and give guidance on sample preparation for novel research technologies. Seventeen international experts in the management of critically ill patients, bronchoscopy in clinical and research settings, and experience in patient-oriented clinical or translational research convened for a workshop. Review of relevant literature, expert presentations, and discussion generated the findings presented herein. The committee concludes that research bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage in critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation is valuable and safe in appropriately selected patients. This report includes recommendations on standardization of this procedure and prioritizes the reporting of sample management to produce more reproducible results between laboratories. This document serves as a resource to the community of researchers who endeavor to include bronchoscopy as part of their research protocols and highlights key considerations for the inclusion and safety of research participants.

Efficacy and safety of ciprofol-remifentanil versus propofol-remifentanil during fiberoptic bronchoscopy: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

Objective: Ciprofol is a novel 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative that has improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties compared with propofol. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofol-remifentanil versus propofol-remifentanil for patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Methods: Overall, 92 patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy were included in this prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial and were equally divided into two groups (n = 46 each). Fentanyl (50 μg) was given 2 min before the intravenous infusion of 0.3 mg/kg of ciprofol or 1.2 mg/kg of propofol over a time period of 30 s. During anesthesia maintenance, 0.05-0.2 μg/kg/min of remifentanil combined with one-third to one-fourth of the initial dose of ciprofol or propofol was repeated at 2-min intervals, as required, to maintain a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (MOAA/S) scale score <3. The primary outcome was the successful rate of fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Secondary outcomes included demographic characteristics, time metrics, hemodynamics, coughing severity, intubating conditions, lowest oxygen saturation, utilization of study drug doses, number of remedies (lidocaine and vasoactive drugs) used, satisfaction scores of both patients and the endoscopist, occurrence of intraoperative awareness, patients' willing to repeat fiberoptic bronchoscopy, and occurrence and severity of adverse events. Results: The successful completion rate of fiberoptic bronchoscopy was 91.30% (42 of 46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.80%-99.80%) in the ciprofol-remifentanil group and 89.13% (41 of 46; 95% CI: 79.80%-98.50%) in the propofol-remifentanil group. Though the clinically acceptable intubating condition was improved in the ciprofol-remifentanil group, this difference has no clinical statistical difference (p > 0.05). No significant differences were noted between the two groups with respect to time metrics, consumption of fentanyl and remifentanil, or number of remedies (lidocaine and vasoactive drugs). Patients' willingness to repeat fiberoptic bronchoscopy and the satisfaction of both patients and endoscopist were significantly higher in the ciprofol-remifentanil than in the propofol-remifentanil group (p < 0.05). Compared with patients in the propofol-remifentanil group, patients in the ciprofol-remifentanil group had more stable hemodynamics. The lowest oxygen saturation was significantly higher in the ciprofol-remifentanil than in the propofol-remifentanil group (p < 0.05). The numbers of patients who experienced pain on injection in the ciprofol-remifentanil group was significantly lower than the number in the propofol-remifentanil group (p < 0.01). Severity of coughing, clinically acceptable severity of coughing, incidence of intraoperative awareness, and other adverse events were all similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). Only four patients experienced grade 2 adverse events (severe hypotension in one patient in the ciprofol-remifentanil group and three patients in the propofol-remifentanil group; p > 0.05); they were treated with noradrenaline. Conclusion: Ciprofol-remifentanil was non-inferior to propofol-remifentanil with regard to successful sedation for flexible bronchoscopy, when used with pre-intravenous administration of 50 μg of fentanyl. At the same time, patients' willingness to repeat flexible bronchoscopy and the satisfactions were all significantly improved.

The Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam Tosilate Versus Dexmedetomidine in Outpatients Undergoing Flexible Bronchoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized, Blind, Non-Inferiority Trial

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosilate-remifentanil (RT-RF) vs dexmedetomidine-remifentanil (Dex-RF) for outpatients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FB).

Patients and methods: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, prospective study involving a total of 146 outpatients undergoing FB divided into two groups. The RT-RF (RR) group (n = 73) received an initial dose of 12 mg/kg/h of RT for 10 min followed by a maintenance dose of 1–2 mg/kg/h, while the Dex-RF (DR) group (n = 73) received an initial dose of 0.5 μg/kg of Dex for 10 min followed by a maintenance dose of 0.2–0.7 μg/kg/h. All outpatients also received 0.05–0.2 μg/kg/min RF to maintain the Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (MOAA/S) scale <3. The primary outcome was rate of successful FB completed. Secondary outcomes were time metrics, hemodynamics, intubating conditions, oxygen saturation, coughing severity, number of remedies, total dose of fentanyl, RF, RT, and Dex, incidence of dreaming, patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction, willingness to repeat bronchoscopy, and adverse events.

Results: The FB successful completion rate was 94.52% (95% CI: 89.20–99.90) in the RR group and 91.78% (95% CI: 85.30–98.20) in the DR group. Compared with patients in the DR group, the onset time, time to fully alert, and hospital discharge were all significantly shorter in the RR group (p < 0.01), and hemodynamics were more stable in the RR group. Intubating conditions, clinically acceptable intubating conditions, lowest oxygen saturation, coughing severity, consumption of fentanyl and RF, number of remedies, and patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction were similar between the groups (p > 0.05), as were demographic characteristics, incidence of dreaming, willingness to repeat bronchoscopy, and adverse events (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: RT-RF has non-inferior efficacy, better time metrics and hemodynamic stability for outpatients undergoing FB than Dex-RF.

Systematic Review Registration: [http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=66673], identifier [ChiCTR2000041524].

Pre- and post-COVID practice of interventional pulmonology in adults in Portugal

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

There is a lack of information regarding bronchoscopy practice in adults in Portugal. Our objective was to obtain an overview of the characteristics, resources, techniques and behaviors in national interventional pulmonology (IP) units, before and after SARS-CoV-2 outbreak.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was developed by an expert panel with a total of 46 questions comprising the specifications of each unit, namely physical space, equipment, staff, procedure planning, monitoring, technical differentiation, and numbers pre- and post-COVID-19. Forty-one interventional pulmonology centers were invited to participate between April and May 2021.

RESULTS

37 units (90.2%) responded to the survey. The majority (64.9%) have a fully dedicated space with a weekly presence of ≥3 chest physicians (82.1%) and support of an anesthesiologist on specific days (48.6%). There is marked heterogeneity in the IP unit's equipment, and 56.8% acquired disposable bronchoscopes after COVID-19 pandemics. Pre-bronchoscopy hemogram, platelet count and coagulation tests are regularly asked by more than 90% of the units, even when deep sedation or biopsies are not planned. In 97.3% of cases, topical anesthesia and midazolam are utilized. Propofol (21.6%) and fentanyl (29.7%) are occasionally employed in some institutions. Most units use ancillary sampling techniques to diagnose central or peripheral lesions, with radial EBUS being used for guidance of distal procedures in 37.8% of centers, linear EBUS and EUS-B-FNA for mediastinal diagnosis and/or staging in 45.9% and 27.0% of units, respectively. Cryobiopsies are used by 21.6% of respondents to diagnose diffuse lung diseases. Rigid bronchoscopy is performed in 37.8% of centers. There was a decrease in the number of flexible (p < 0.001) and rigid (p = 0.005) bronchoscopies and an upscale of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 outbreak.

CONCLUSIONS

IP units have variable bronchoscopic practices, but during the COVID-19 pandemic, they complied with most international recommendations, as elective procedures were postponed and PPE levels increased.

Anesthesia for interventional pulmonology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anesthesia for pulmonological interventions is a demanding challenge. This article discusses recent innovations and the implications for periinterventional anesthetic management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Interventional pulmonology is a rapidly expanding specialty with very complex diagnostic and therapeutic approaches that include oncological staging, treatment of obstructive and restrictive lung diseases, recanalization of endobronchial obstructions, and retrieval of foreign bodies. With the development of advanced diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, the application is extended to critically ill patients. Current evidence focusing on the anesthetic techniques is presented here.

SUMMARY

The development of new pulmonological methods requires a tailored anesthesiological approach. Their specific impact must be taken into account to ensure patient safety, goal-oriented outcome diagnostics and -quality, successful interventions, and patient comfort.