Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction by instillation of fibrinogen and thrombin in COPD patients with homogenous emphysema

BACKGROUND

The new endobronchial therapy called biological lung volume reduction (BioLVR) involves using a rapid polymerizing sealant to block off the most emphysematous portions of the lungs. The primary mechanism of action is resorption atelectasis, which is then followed by inflammation and remodeling of the airspace. The remodeling process will result in the formation of scars, leading to the contraction of the lung tissue. As a result, a decrease in functional lung volume is anticipated for a period of 6-8 weeks.

OBJECTIVE

Assessing the safety and effectiveness of bronchoscopic installation of (fibrinogen and thrombin) in COPD patients with homogeneous emphysema in terms of radiological, physiological, and quality of life outcomes.

METHODS

Between December 2017 and December 2019, 40 COPD patients with homogeneous emphysema were studied using a fiber optic bronchoscope while they were awake but sedated. Tanta University Hospitals' chest medicine department collaborated with the diagnostic radiology department of the Faculty of Medicine.

RESULTS

All the following parameters were reduced from their initial values: HRCT volumetry, RV/TLC, mMRC dyspnea scale, CAT score, 6MWT, FEV1, and the FEV1/FVC ratio at the first, third, and sixth months from the beginning (p = 0.001). One individual (0.025%) had pneumonia, whereas three individuals had COPD (0.075%). Using fibrin glue produced locally, biological lung volume reduction (Bio LVR) may be an effective treatment for advanced homogenous emphysema.

CONCLUSION

By using locally prepared fibrin glue the biologic lung volume reduction (Bio LVR) may be a convenient method to treat advanced homogenous emphysema.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction in emphysema: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a substantial burden on the healthcare system and is currently considered the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. Emphysema, as evidenced by severe air-trapping in patients with COPD, leads to significant dyspnea and morbidity. Lung volume reduction via surgery or minimally invasive endobronchial interventions are currently available, which improve lung function and quality of life.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newer studies have noted a survival benefit in patients post bronchoscopic lung volume reduction vs. those subjected to standard of care. The presence of collateral ventilation is one of the most common impeding factors to placing endobronchial valves, and if placed, these patients might not achieve lobar atelectasis; however, there are newer modalities that are now available for patients with collateral ventilation which we have described.

SUMMARY

Combining standard of care treatment that includes smoking cessation, bronchodilators, preventive care including vaccinations, pulmonary rehabilitation, and endobronchial treatment using various interventions in decreasing hyperinflation improves quality of life and may improve survival and hence significantly reduce the burden of COPD on healthcare.

Surgical and bronchoscopic pulmonary function-improving procedures in lung emphysema

COPD is a highly prevalent, chronic and irreversible obstructive airway disease without curative treatment. Standard therapeutic strategies, both non-pharmacological and pharmacological, have only limited effects on lung function parameters of patients with severe disease. Despite optimal pharmacological treatment, many patients with severe COPD still have a high burden of dyspnoea and a poor quality of life. If these patients have severe lung emphysema, with hyperinflation as the driver of symptoms and exercise intolerance, lung volume reduction may be an effective treatment with a significant impact on lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life. Currently, different lung volume reduction approaches, both surgical and bronchoscopic, have shown encouraging results and have been implemented in COPD treatment recommendations. Nevertheless, choosing the optimal lung volume reduction strategy for an individual patient remains challenging. Moreover, there is still room for improving durability of effect and safety in all available procedures. Ongoing and innovative research is essential to push this field forwards. This review provides an overview of results and limitations of the current lung volume reduction options for patients with severe lung emphysema and hyperinflation.

A multicenter, prospective, single-arm clinical investigation of a modified staged treatment algorithm using the AeriSeal system - The STAGE trial

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with AeriSeal is an alternate treatment option to achieve lung volume reduction in patients with severe COPD and emphysema who are not eligible for valve treatment. This study aimed to assess the safety and mode of action of a modified staged treatment algorithm with a staged treatment with lower dose of AeriSeal.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, multicenter feasibility study. AeriSeal was administered during two sequential bronchoscopies: 2 subsegments of a lobe treated with two 5 mL doses, followed by two 10 mL doses in a contralateral lobe after 6 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 14 patients (36% male, mean FEV₁ 28.4% ± 6.7% of predicted) were enrolled. Ten patients completed both treatments, four were treated unilaterally. AeriSeal treatment resulted in significant TLVR (median 220.5 mL) at 3 months follow up. There were no significant changes from baseline at 12 months in lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life. During the 3-month post-treatment period, respiratory SAEs included 5 COPD exacerbations in 4 (28.6%) subjects, post-treatment acute inflammatory response (PAIR) in 2 (14.3%) subjects, and 1 respiratory failure event in 1 (7.1%) subject.

CONCLUSION

The staged and lower dosed administration of AeriSeal does not impact the overall safety profile in terms of reducing the type and frequency of respiratory SAEs previously reported for a single-stage treatment. A larger volume of AeriSeal than used in this study may be necessary to provide meaningful clinical benefits.

Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction for Emphysema: Review and Update

In carefully selected patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, characterized by emphysema and hyperinflation, lung volume reduction is an option to reduce lung hyperinflation, improve lung function, quality of life, and exercise capacity. Currently, there are several bronchoscopic and surgical treatment options to achieve lung volume reduction. It is important to carefully phenotype these patients, to select the optimal treatment option, with consideration of possible adverse events or contraindications, and it is highly recommended to discuss these treatment strategies in a multidisciplinary team. The treatment with one-way endobronchial valves has been investigated most extensively and more data are available regarding the treatment of more "marginal cases," or subsequent lung volume reduction surgery. Other bronchoscopic lung volume reduction options include treatment with coils, thermal vapor ablation, and sclerosant agents. In this review, we aim to summarize the current clinical evidence on the bronchoscopic lung volume reduction therapies and important aspects regarding optimal patient selection.

Crosslink bio-adhesives for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: current status and future direction

Several bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) treatments have been developed to reduce hyperinflation in emphysema patients. Lung bio-adhesives are among the most promising new BLVR treatment options, as they potentially provide a permanent solution for emphysematous patients after only a single application. To date, bio-adhesives have mainly been used as haemostats and tissue sealants, while their application in permanently contracting and sealing hyperinflated lung tissue has recently been identified as a novel and enticing opportunity. However, a major drawback of the current adhesive technology is the induction of severe inflammatory responses and adverse events upon administration. In our review, we distinguish between and discuss various natural, semi-synthetic and synthetic tissue haemostats and sealants that have been used for pulmonary applications such as sealing air/fluid leaks. Furthermore, we present an overview of the different materials including AeriSeal and autologous blood that have been used to achieve lung volume reduction and discuss their respective advantages and drawbacks. In conclusion, we describe the key biological (therapeutic benefit and biocompatibility) and biomechanical (degradability, adhesive strength, stiffness, viscoelasticity, tunability and self-healing capacity) characteristics that are essential for an ideal lung bio-adhesive material with the potential to overcome the concerns related to current adhesives.

Bronchoscopic management of asthma, COPD and emphysema

In recent years, many bronchoscopic techniques have been developed in chronic obstructive airway inflammatory diseases, including asthma, COPD and emphysema. The main techniques with available data from randomised controlled trials are: 1) bronchial thermoplasty in asthma; 2) valves, coils and thermal vapor ablation in emphysema; and 3) targeted lung denervation in COPD. The objectives of this article are to describe the levels of evidence for efficacy and safety, long-term follow-up results beyond 1 year, and current recommendations for clinical practice from international guidelines for each technique.

Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction with Autologous Blood: What is the Evidence?

Biological lung volume reduction (BioLVR) is a novel and low-cost endobronchial treatment method aimed at reducing the volume of the target lung lobe using biological agents, including fibrin-based hydrogel, fibrinogen, and autologous blood (AB) with thrombin. BioLVR induces local inflammation, resulting in acute airway obstruction, resorption atelectasis, fibrosis, and finally tissue remodeling by contraction of the target lobe and reduction in the lung volume, similar to the application of hot water vapor and foam. In addition, patients with severe impairment in lung function and quality of life may refuses to undergo surgery, resulting in limited treatment options. In such complex clinical scenarios, BioLVR with AB appears to be a good therapeutic option. These treatment modalities resulted in favorable outcomes in patients with heterogeneous and bullous emphysema, pulmonary lymphangioleiomyomatosis, and giant bullous lesions. AB applications result in functional improvement, improvement in the quality of life, decrease in dyspnea scores, and reduction in the size of bullae. Based on the available evidence, application of AB for lung volume reduction is minimally invasive and well tolerated by patients. There was no incidence of pneumothorax or mortality. This review aimed to investigate the benefits, complications, and future perspectives of AB application as BioLVR in the treatment of hyperinflated lung diseases.

Bronchoscopic interventions for severe emphysema: Where are we now?

Patients with severe emphysema have limited treatment options and only derive a small benefit from optimal medical treatment. The only other therapy to have significant clinical beneficial effect in emphysema is LVRS but the perceived risk and invasiveness of surgery has fuelled bronchoscopic approaches to induce lung volume reduction. There are multiple bronchoscopic methods for achieving volume reduction in severe emphysema: EBV, airway bypass procedure, endobronchial coils, thermal (vapour) sclerosis and chemical sclerosis (sealants). Optimal patient selection is key to successful patient outcomes. This review discusses bronchoscopic approaches for emphysema treatment which has progressed through clinical trials to clinical practice.

Bronchoscopic device intervention in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a heterogeneous syndrome associated with varying degrees of parenchymal emphysema and airway inflammation resulting in decreased expiratory flow, lung hyperinflation, and symptoms leading to decreased exercise tolerance and quality of life. Impairment in lung function and quality of life persists following guideline-based medical therapy, thus surgical and minimally invasive bronchoscopic approaches were developed to address this unmet need. We offer a narrative review of the available technologies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although lung volume reduction surgery has been shown to improve survival in appropriately selected patients, it is infrequently performed. Less invasive bronchoscopic procedures have thus been explored including endobronchial valves, coils, lung sealant, thermal vapor, and other airway approaches. Selection criteria including severity of physiologic and radiographic impairment, degree of lung hyperinflation, presence of intact fissures, type of symptoms, and presence of comorbidities are critical in selecting appropriate candidates.

SUMMARY

Recent advances in minimally invasive approaches to lung volume reduction have offered alternatives to surgical approaches. Two endobronchial valve devices are Food and Drug Administration approved for clinical use, and investigations into alternative bronchoscopic therapies to treat both emphysema and chronic bronchitis have been performed or are currently underway. Notably, each of these treatments requires unique selection criteria and thus a personalized approach to treatment.

Predictors of Response to Endobronchial Coil Therapy in Patients With Advanced Emphysema

BACKGROUND

The Lung Volume Reduction Coil Treatment in Patients With Emphysema (RENEW) trial reported improvements in quality of life, pulmonary function, and exercise performance following endobronchial coil treatment.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this post hoc analysis was to identify baseline predictors, including quantitative CT measures, that identify patients most likely to significantly benefit from endobronchial coil therapy.

METHODS

Quantitative CT analysis by an independent radiology laboratory and a qualitative evaluation by five blinded experts of the baseline thoracic CT imaging were performed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to elucidate characteristics associated with clinical response.

RESULTS

In total, 125 patients underwent coil treatment and had evaluable 12-month follow-up results. Of these, 78 patients received treatment of lobes with the highest emphysematous destruction determined by quantitative CT analysis (quantitative visual match [QVM]+), and 47 received treatment in at least one lobe that was not the most destroyed (QVM-). From the 78 patients with QVM+ treatment, a subgroup of 50 patients (64%) was identified with baseline residual volume > 200% predicted, emphysema score > 20% low attenuation area, and absence of airway disease. In this subgroup, greater lobar residual volume reduction in the treated lobes was achieved, which was associated with significant mean ± SE improvement in FEV₁ (15.2 ± 3.1%), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (-12 ± 2 points), and residual volume (-0.57 ± 0.13 L).

DISCUSSION

This post hoc analysis found that both significant hyperinflation (residual volume ≥ 200% predicted) and CT analysis are critical for patient selection and treatment planning for endobronchial coil therapy. Quantitative CT analysis is important to identify optimal lobar treatment and to exclude patients with insufficient emphysema (< 20% low attenuation area), whereas visual assessment identifies patients with signs of airway disease associated with worse outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01608490; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Efficacy and Safety of Stent, Valves, Vapour ablation, Coils and Sealant Therapies in Advanced Emphysema: A Meta-Analysis

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) methods have emerged as a new treatment option for patients with severe emphysema. Endobronchial valves and coils have been extensively studied. This review assesses efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of the BLVR procedures (stent, valves, vapor ablation, endobronchial coils, lung sealant) in patients with severe emphysema. Databases were searched until October 2016, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing available BLVR procedures to standard medical care or sham bronchoscopy were included. Random effect model and generic inverse variance approach were used for meta-analysis. Out of 381 identified records, 16 RCTs were included. As compared to recommended medical care or sham bronchoscopy, the BLVR procedures are more effective in improving quality of life [SGRQ score (WMD=-6.38; -9.12 to -3.65)] and 6MWT (WMD=24.21; 9.68-38.74) and percentage FEV₁ (WMD=10.48; 7.07-13.89). Increased risk of serious adverse events (RR=2.18; 1.63-2.93), specifically for chronic pulmonary obstructive disease exacerbations and lower respiratory tract infection combined (RR=1.37; 1.07-1.75), were observed with bronchoscopic interventions, while there was no difference in number of deaths (RR=1.25; 0.79-1.99) and respiratory failure (RR=1.13; 0.57-2.21). The BLVR procedures, especially endobronchial coils, were found to be effective in the management of patients with severe emphysema irrespective of collateral ventilation. However, characterization of patients who would be most benefited from these procedures is required, and effectiveness of these procedures in long run needs to be established.

Bronchoscopic treatment of emphysema: an update

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the major causes of disability and mortality. The efficacy of maximal medical treatment, although effective at the early stages of the disease, becomes limited when extensive alveolar destruction is the main cause of respiratory failure. At this stage of the disease more aggressive options, when feasible, should be considered. Lung transplantation and lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) are currently available for a selected group of patients. Endoscopic alternatives to LVRS have progressively gained acceptance and are currently employed in patients with COPD. They promote lung deflation searching the same outcome as LVRS in terms of respiratory mechanics, ameliorating the distressing symptom of chronic dyspnea by decreasing the physiological dead space.

Thermic and chemical procedures for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction

In the last 14 years several endoscopic procedures have been developed to offer patients with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and emphysema further therapeutic options, complementary to a medical treatment. In addition to the established valve implantation, new approaches have been available since 2009. These procedures include bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation (BTVA) and polymeric lung volume reduction. Both therapies are independent of collateral ventilation (CV), are irreversible and can be used on segmental (BTVA) and sub-segmental level [polymeric lung volume reduction (PLVR)], in contrast to valve therapy. The intention is to induce a local inflammation with a following fibrosis and shrinkage and thus a volume reduction in the treated lung areas. Currently, only patients with predominant upper-lobe emphysema are treated. An improvement of lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life could be proved in RCTs for BTVA as well as for PLVR. However, the data for PLVR is very limited and has recently been available only in studies. Furthermore, the risk profile is unfavourable with a high number of adverse respiratory events. While BTVA is an established new approach, the PLVR requires re-evaluation regarding materials, predictive factors, safety profile and dosage.

Complications after bronchoscopic lung volume reduction

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) has been demonstrated an efficient and safe alternative to surgery in multiple randomized trials and retrospective cohort studies. However, despite its minimal invasiveness BLVR is not without potential harm. Complications and their incidents differ significantly between the individual BLVR techniques (valves, coils, vapour or sealant) which are bearing varying device- and intervention-dependent risks. Interventional pulmonologists must be aware of potential side effects and their management to anticipate and ensure highest quality treatment of the severely ill emphysema patient.

Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction: A 2018 Review and Update

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) procedure has expanded the treatment spectrum of patients with end-stage emphysema. These treatments include valve, coil, thermal vapor ablation, bio-lung volume reduction, targeted lung denervation, and airway bypass stent. This short review provides an up-to-date information on BLVR treatments, their clinical benefits, and an overview of complications. BLVR treatments generally affect dyspnea by reducing hyperinflation and residual volume (RV). Benefits of treatment are associated with improvement in lung function parameters (forced expiration volume in the first second, total lung capacity, RV, and 6-minute walking test) and quality of life. Serious potential pulmonary complications, such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation, may also occur after BLVR treatment. In addition to these, low-cost BLVR methods, such as autologous blood and fibrin glue, are in the developmental stage. Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction treatments are a promising method with positive results for patients with severe emphysema. The widespread use of these techniques, inadequate selection of patients, and non-critical and, therefore, unsuccessful use of BLVR in non-specialist centers lead to a false negative impression of the effectiveness of these techniques. In addition to these considerations, it is obvious that these treatments, which are quite expensive, are burdening social health systems. The reduction of costs or the development of lower-cost treatment methods is important for the future and for the availability of treatments.

Review of lung sealant technologies for lung volume reduction in pulmonary disease

Emphysema is an incurable and underdiagnosed disease with obstructive ventilatory impairment of lung function. Despite decades of research, medical treatments available so far did not significantly improve the survival benefits. Different bronchoscopic methods for lung volume reduction (LVR) in emphysema were used in the past 2 decades aiming to close the airways serving the hyperinflated lung regions and to allow the gas in the more distal bullas to be absorbed. Sealants and adhesives can be natural/biological, synthetic and semisynthetic. In lung surgery, lung sealants are used to treat prolonged air leak, which is the most common complication. Sealants can also be applied in bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) as they administer into the peripheral airways where they polymerize and act as tissue glue on the surface of the lung to seal the target area to cause durable permanent absorption atelectasis. Initial studies analyzed the efficacy of bronchoscopic instillation of a fibrinogen-thrombin complex solution in advanced emphysema. Future studies will analyze the effects of adding chondroitin sulfate and poly-L-lysine to thrombin-fibrinogen complex thus promoting fibroblast attachment, proliferation and scarring, causing bronchial fibrostenosis and preventing ventilation of the affected part of the lung. Modifications of these methods were later developed, and the efficacy of BLVR with other sealants was analyzed in clinical studies. Results from current studies using this treatment method are promising showing that it is effective in improving exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with advanced emphysema. It seems that subjective benefits in dyspnea scores and quality of life are more marked than improvements in lung function tests. The safety profile of sealant techniques in BLVR was mostly acceptable in clinical studies. The definite conclusions about the effectiveness of sealant in BLVR could be difficult because only a small population was involved in the current studies. More randomized large controlled studies are needed in establishing the definite role of biological BLVR in the bronchoscopic treatment of emphysema.

Endobronchial Valve Therapy in Patients with Homogeneous Emphysema. Results from the IMPACT Study

RATIONALE

Endobronchial valves (EBVs) have been successfully used in patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema to improve lung physiology. Limited available data suggest that EBVs are also effective in homogeneous emphysema.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of EBVs in patients with homogeneous emphysema with absence of collateral ventilation assessed with the Chartis system.

METHODS

Prospective, multicenter, 1:1 randomized controlled trial of EBV plus standard of care (SoC) or SoC alone. Primary outcome was the percentage change in FEV₁ (liters) at 3 months relative to baseline in the EBV group versus the SoC group. Secondary outcomes included changes in FEV₁, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), 6-minute-walk distance (6MWD), and target lobe volume reduction.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-three subjects (age, 63.7 ± 6.1 yr [mean ± SD]; FEV₁, % predicted, 29.3 ± 6.5; residual volume, % predicted, 275.4 ± 59.4) were allocated to either the EBV group (n = 43) or the SoC group (n = 50). In the intention-to-treat population, at 3 months postprocedure, improvement in FEV₁ from baseline was 13.7 ± 28.2% in the EBV group and -3.2 ± 13.0% in the SoC group (mean between-group difference, 17.0%; P = 0.0002). Other variables demonstrated statistically and clinically significant changes from baseline to 3 months (EBV vs. SoC, respectively: SGRQ, -8.63 ± 11.25 vs. 1.01 ± 9.36; and 6MWD, 22.63 ± 66.63 m vs. -17.34 ± 52.8 m). Target lobe volume reduction at 3 months was -1,195 ± 683 ml (P < 0.0001). Of the EBV subjects, 97.2% achieved volume reduction in the target lobe (P < 0.0001). Procedure-related pneumothoraces occurred in 11 subjects (25.6%). Five subjects required removal/replacement of one or more valves. One subject experienced two valve migration events requiring removal/replacement of valves.

CONCLUSIONS

EBV in patients with homogeneous emphysema without collateral ventilation results in clinically meaningful benefits of improved lung function, exercise tolerance, and quality of life.

Long-term Imaging of the Lungs After Sealant Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to assess the pulmonary temporal changes after bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) using sealants for treatment of emphysema.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively assessed all chest computerized tomography (CT) and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography CT scans of patients treated at our institution with BLVR.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were treated with sealants: 4 with biological sealants and 7 with synthetic sealants. The first CT scan after biological sealant treatment showed no abnormalities in 8 lobes and 5 nodules, and 3 consolidations in 7 lobes. All findings resolved within 3 months, except for a nodule that decreased after 2 months and remained stable for 9 years. The first CT scan after utilizing the synthetic sealant showed abnormalities in each treated lobe: 19 nodules/masses (16 cavitary, 3 solid) and 3 consolidations. Follow-up CT scans were available for 16 nodules/masses: 1 resolved, 12 slowly decreased in size, 1 remained unchanged, and 2 grew. Of 3 consolidations 1 resolved and 2 decreased in size. FDG positron emission tomography CT scans performed in 2 patients showed FDG uptake higher than mediastinal background activity in 2 nodules in the same patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary changes after BLVR are variable. After treatment with biological sealants, most findings resolve within 3 months. In contrast, after synthetic sealants, although the majority regress over time, some show waxing and waning in growth that can mimic malignancy. FDG uptake in some of these lesions is suggestive of chronic inflammation. Radiologists should be aware of the spectrum of these pulmonary changes to avoid misdiagnosis of lung cancer.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction procedures for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

In the recent years, a variety of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) procedures have emerged that may provide a treatment option to participants suffering from moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of BLVR on the short- and long-term health outcomes in participants with moderate to severe COPD and determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of each individual technique.

SEARCH METHODS

Studies were identified from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR) and by handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. All searches are current until 07 December 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We included studies reported as full text, those published as abstract only and unpublished data, if available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent review authors assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. Where possible, data from more than one study were combined in a meta-analysis using RevMan 5 software.

MAIN RESULTS

AeriSealOne RCT of 95 participants found that AeriSeal compared to control led to a significant median improvement in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) (18.9%, interquartile range (IQR) -0.7% to 41.9% versus 1.3%, IQR -8.2% to 12.9%), and higher quality of life, as measured by the St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (-12 units, IQR -22 units to -5 units, versus -3 units, IQR -5 units to 1 units), P = 0.043 and P = 0.0072 respectively. Although there was no significant difference in mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.90, 95% CI 0.14 to 62.15), adverse events were more common for participants treated with AeriSeal (OR 3.71, 95% CI 1.34 to 10.24). The quality of evidence found in this prematurely terminated study was rated low to moderate. Airway bypass stentsTreatment with airway bypass stents compared to control did not lead to significant between-group changes in FEV₁ (0.95%, 95% CI -0.16% to 2.06%) or SGRQ scores (-2.00 units, 95% CI -5.58 units to 1.58 units), as found by one study comprising 315 participants. There was no significant difference in mortality (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.77), nor were there significant differences in adverse events (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.73) between the two groups. The quality of evidence was rated moderate to high. Endobronchial coilsThree studies comprising 461 participants showed that treatment with endobronchial coils compared to control led to a significant between-group mean difference in FEV₁ (10.88%, 95% CI 5.20% to 16.55%) and SGRQ (-9.14 units, 95% CI -11.59 units to -6.70 units). There were no significant differences in mortality (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.29), but adverse events were significantly more common for participants treated with coils (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.23). The quality of evidence ranged from low to high. Endobronchial valvesFive studies comprising 703 participants found that endobronchial valves versus control led to significant improvements in FEV₁ (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.64) and scores on the SGRQ (-7.29 units, 95% CI -11.12 units to -3.45 units). There were no significant differences in mortality between the two groups (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.43) but adverse events were more common in the endobronchial valve group (OR 5.85, 95% CI 2.16 to 15.84). Participant selection plays an important role as absence of collateral ventilation was associated with superior clinically significant improvements in health outcomes. The quality of evidence ranged from low to high. Intrabronchial valvesIn the comparison of partial bilateral placement of intrabronchial valves to control, one trial favoured control in FEV₁ (-2.11% versus 0.04%, P = 0.001) and one trial found no difference between the groups (0.9 L versus 0.87 L, P = 0.065). There were no significant differences in SGRQ scores (MD 2.64 units, 95% CI -0.28 units to 5.56 units) or mortality rates (OR 4.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 28.94), but adverse events were more frequent (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.48 to 7.84) in participants treated with intrabronchial valves. The lack of functional benefits may be explained by the procedural strategy used, as another study (22 participants) compared unilateral versus partial bilateral placement, finding significant improvements in FEV₁ and SGRQ when using the unilateral approach. The quality of evidence ranged between moderate to high. Vapour ablationOne study of 69 participants found significant mean between-group differences in FEV₁ (14.70%, 95% CI 7.98% to 21.42%) and SGRQ (-9.70 units, 95% CI -15.62 units to -3.78 units), favouring vapour ablation over control. There was no significant between-group difference in mortality (OR 2.82, 95% CI 0.13 to 61.06), but vapour ablation led to significantly more adverse events (OR 3.86, 95% CI 1.00 to 14.97). The quality of evidence ranged from low to moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results for selected BLVR procedures indicate they can provide significant and clinically meaningful short-term (up to one year) improvements in health outcomes, but this was at the expense of increased adverse events. The currently available evidence is not sufficient to assess the effect of BLVR procedures on mortality. These findings are limited by the lack of long-term follow-up data, limited availability of cost-effectiveness data, significant heterogeneity in results, presence of skew and high CIs, and the open-label character of a number of the studies.

Predicting Structure-Function Relations and Survival following Surgical and Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Treatment of Emphysema

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) and bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (bLVR) are palliative treatments aimed at reducing hyperinflation in advanced emphysema. Previous work has evaluated functional improvements and survival advantage for these techniques, although their effects on the micromechanical environment in the lung have yet to be determined. Here, we introduce a computational model to simulate a force-based destruction of elastic networks representing emphysema progression, which we use to track the response to lung volume reduction via LVRS and bLVR. We find that (1) LVRS efficacy can be predicted based on pre-surgical network structure; (2) macroscopic functional improvements following bLVR are related to microscopic changes in mechanical force heterogeneity; and (3) both techniques improve aspects of survival and quality of life influenced by lung compliance, albeit while accelerating disease progression. Our model predictions yield unique insights into the microscopic origins underlying emphysema progression before and after lung volume reduction.

Surgical and, more recently, bronchoscopic lung volume reduction is the only available treatments for patients with advanced stage emphysema. Several large-scale, clinical studies have outlined appropriate selection criteria based on patient outcomes; however, the underlying mechanisms determining disease progression and response to these treatments are not well-understood. To answer this question, we have developed a network model of the lung to compare immediate and long-term response to each treatment. This approach allows us to directly study macroscopic changes in function related to microscopic changes in the local structural and mechanical environment. In addition, it facilitates direct comparisons between surgical and bronchoscopic lung volume reduction given identical initial conditions, which is not feasible in a clinical study. We propose here a mechanism suggesting that lung volume reduction efficacy is intimately linked to changes in microscopic force heterogeneity within the lung. Such an understanding of the mechanisms driving emphysema has the potential to greatly improve current therapies for this condition through more rationalized, patient-specific treatment strategies.

Status of and prospects for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction for patients with severe emphysema

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) is a minimally invasive treatment for severe emphysema, providing treatment options for patients who are unable to undergo lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) or lung transplantation. Current BLVR techniques include bronchoscopic volume reduction with valve implants, use of a lung volume reduction coil (LVRC), bronchoscopic thermal vapor ablation (BTVA), biological lung volume reduction (BioLVR), and use of airway bypass stents (ABS). To date, several randomized controlled trials of these bronchoscopic therapies have been conducted in patients with emphysema, and bronchoscopic volume reduction with valve implants remains the best approach thus far. Recent studies indicate that BLVR may be of great value in improving lung function, exercise capacity, and quality of life and that BLVR has the potential to replace conventional surgery for patients with severe emphysema. Optimal patient selection and the proper selection of the BLVR technique in accordance with patient characteristics are crucial to the success of BLVR. More multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trials need to be conducted in the future to optimize the current selection strategy and evaluate the safety, efficiency, and long-term benefit of BLVR techniques.

Low cost biological lung volume reduction therapy for advanced emphysema

BACKGROUND

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR), using biological agents, is one of the new alternatives to lung volume reduction surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate efficacy and safety of biological BLVR using low cost agents including autologous blood and fibrin glue.

METHODS

Enrolled patients were divided into two groups: group A (seven patients) in which autologous blood was used and group B (eight patients) in which fibrin glue was used. The agents were injected through a triple lumen balloon catheter via fiberoptic bronchoscope. Changes in high resolution computerized tomography (HRCT) volumetry, pulmonary function tests, symptoms, and exercise capacity were evaluated at 12 weeks postprocedure as well as for complications.

RESULTS

In group A, at 12 weeks postprocedure, there was significant improvement in the mean value of HRCT volumetry and residual volume/total lung capacity (% predicted) (P-value: <0.001 and 0.038, respectively). In group B, there was significant improvement in the mean value of HRCT volumetry and (residual volume/total lung capacity % predicted) (P-value: 0.005 and 0.004, respectively). All patients tolerated the procedure with no mortality.

CONCLUSION

BLVR using autologous blood and locally prepared fibrin glue is a promising method for therapy of advanced emphysema in term of efficacy, safety as well as cost effectiveness.

Lung volume reduction of pulmonary emphysema: the radiologist task

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several lung volume reduction (LVR) techniques have been increasingly evaluated in patients with advanced pulmonary emphysema, especially in the last decade. Radiologist plays a pivotal role in the characterization of parenchymal damage and, thus, assessment of eligibility criteria. This review aims to discuss the most common LVR techniques, namely LVR surgery, endobronchial valves, and coils LVR, with emphasis on the role of computed tomography (CT).

RECENT FINDINGS

Several trials have recently highlighted the importance of regional quantification of emphysema by computerized CT-based segmentation of hyperlucent parenchyma, which is strongly recommended for candidates to any LVR treatment. In particular, emphysema distribution pattern and fissures integrity are evaluated to tailor the choice of the most appropriate LVR technique. Furthermore, a number of CT measures have been tested for the personalization of treatment, according to imaging detected heterogeneity of parenchymal disease.

SUMMARY

CT characterization of heterogeneous parenchymal abnormalities provides criteria for selection of the preferable treatment in each patient and improves outcome of LVR as reflected by better quality of life, higher exercise tolerance, and lower mortality.

Update on Nonsurgical Lung Volume Reduction Procedures

There has been a surge of interest in endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) strategies for advanced COPD. Valve implants, coil implants, biological LVR (BioLVR), bronchial thermal vapour ablation, and airway stents are used to induce lung deflation with the ultimate goal of improving respiratory mechanics and chronic dyspnea. Patients presenting with severe air trapping (e.g., inspiratory capacity/total lung capacity (TLC) < 25%, residual volume > 225% predicted) and thoracic hyperinflation (TLC > 150% predicted) have the greatest potential to derive benefit from ELVR procedures. Pre-LVRS or ELVR assessment should ideally include cardiological evaluation, high resolution CT scan, ventilation and perfusion scintigraphy, full pulmonary function tests, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. ELVR procedures are currently available in selected Canadian research centers as part of ethically approved clinical trials. If a decision is made to offer an ELVR procedure, one-way valves are the first option in the presence of complete lobar exclusion and no significant collateral ventilation. When the fissure is not complete, when collateral ventilation is evident in heterogeneous emphysema or when emphysema is homogeneous, coil implants or BioLVR (in that order) are the next logical alternatives.

Radiologic manifestations of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJECTIVE. Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction promises to become an effective treatment option in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Several techniques are currently being investigated, including implantation of devices into the lung and instillation of hot water vapor or polymer. This article reviews the spectrum of radiologic manifestations on chest radiography and CT that occur after the intervention. CONCLUSION. Familiarity with the intended effects and adverse events will aid the radiologist in supporting bronchoscopic lung volume reduction.

Endobronchial coils for severe emphysema are effective up to 12 months following treatment: medium term and cross-over results from a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical need for therapeutic options to reduce hyperinflation associated with severe emphysema. Endobronchial Coils (coils) are nitinol devices implanted bronchoscopically under fluoroscopic guidance to re-tension the lung. We report the medium term effectiveness and safety of coils in a study of patients with emphysema.

METHODS

Forty five subjects with severe airflow obstruction and hyperinflation received bilateral sequential treatment with coils (30 day interval between treatments) as part of a randomised controlled trial with a primary endpoint 90 days after the final treatment (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01334307). Further assessments were made at 180 and 360 days and in this study the primary outcome was the effect of coil treatment on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) 360 days following treatment.

RESULTS

At 360 days following treatment, there was an improvement in the SGRQ score of -6.1±14.0 points (p = 0.01) compared to baseline. Improvements in secondary outcomes were seen with increases in forced expiratory volume in the first second of 8.9 ±22.2% (p = 0.002) and 6-minute walking distance of 34.1±52.4m (p = 0.003). The safety profile was acceptable out to 360 days post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically and clinically meaningful benefits in quality of life, exercise capacity and pulmonary function in patients treated with coils are sustained twelve months after treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01334307.

A randomised trial of lung sealant versus medical therapy for advanced emphysema

Uncontrolled pilot studies demonstrated promising results of endoscopic lung volume reduction using emphysematous lung sealant (ELS) in patients with advanced, upper lobe predominant emphysema. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ELS in a randomised controlled setting.Patients were randomised to ELS plus medical treatment or medical treatment alone. Despite early termination for business reasons and inability to assess the primary 12-month end-point, 95 out of 300 patients were successfully randomised, providing sufficient data for 3- and 6-month analysis.57 patients (34 treatment and 23 control) had efficacy results at 3 months; 34 (21 treatment and 13 control) at 6 months. In the treatment group, 3-month lung function, dyspnoea, and quality of life improved significantly from baseline when compared to control. Improvements persisted at 6 months with >50% of treated patients experiencing clinically important improvements, including some whose lung function improved by >100%. 44% of treated patients experienced adverse events requiring hospitalisation (2.5-fold more than control, p=0.01), with two deaths in the treated cohort. Treatment responders tended to be those experiencing respiratory adverse events.Despite early termination, results show that minimally invasive ELS may be efficacious, yet significant risks (probably inflammatory) limit its current utility.

Morphologic Response of the Pulmonary Vasculature to Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction has been used to reduce lung hyperinflation in selected patients with severe emphysema. Little is known about the effect of this procedure on the intraparenchymal pulmonary vasculature. In this study we used CT based vascular reconstruction to quantify the effect of the procedure on the pulmonary vasculature.

METHODS

Intraparenchymal vasculature was reconstructed and quantified in 12 patients with CT scans at baseline and 12 weeks following bilateral introduction of sealants in the upper lobes. The volume of each lung and each lobe was measured, and the vascular volume profile was calculated for both lower lobes. The detected vasculature was further labeled manually as arterial or venous in the right lower lobe.

RESULTS

There was an increase in the volume of the lower lobes (3.14L to 3.25L, p=0.0005). There was an increase in BV5, defined as the volume of blood vessels with cross sectional area of less than 5mm², (53.2ml to 57.9ml, p=0.03). This was found to be correlated with the increase in lower lobe volumes (R=0.65, p=0.02). The changes appear to be symmetric for veins and arteries with a correlation coefficient of 0.87 and a slope of near identity.

CONCLUSION

In the subjects studied, there was an increase, from baseline, in BV5 in the lower lobes that correlated with the change in the volume of the lower lobes. The change appeared to be symmetric for both arteries and veins. The study illustrates the use of intraparenchymal pulmonary vascular reconstruction to study morphologic changes in response to interventions.

Bronchoscopic interventions for severe COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) causes severe handicap among smokers. Most patients have to remain under continuous oxygen therapy at home. Moreover, respiratory infections are very common among these patients and vaccination is obligatory against influenza. Emphysema and bronchiectasis are observed with computed tomography (CT) and in several situations these parenchymal damages are responsible for pneumothorax in one case and pseudomonas aeroginosa infection. Novel mini-invasive techniques are used currently for emphysema treatments which are described extensively throughout our current work.

Airway bacterial colonization and serum C-reactive protein are associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation following bronchoscopic lung volume reduction

INTRODUCTION

Stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients often have lower airway bacterial colonization (ABC) which may modulate exacerbation frequency. Data regarding the association between ABC and post-procedural COPD exacerbations following bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) are scant.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to explore the correlation among ABC, serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level and the risk of COPD exacerbation within a month following BLVR.

METHODS

Pre-procedure bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) quantitative bacterial cultures and serum levels of CRP were evaluated in severe COPD patients (N = 70, mean FEV1  = 34.6%) before BLVR by polymeric lung sealant.

RESULTS

Colonization with potential pathogenic microorganism (PPM) was observed in 40 (57.1%) patients. Out of 28 patients (40%) who had COPD exacerbation within 30 days of BLVR, 23 (82.1%) had PPM in BAL culture compared with only 14 (33.3%) out of 42 patients who had uneventful procedure (P = 0.0027). Serum CRP level was significantly higher in patients with exacerbation compared with those with no exacerbation (mean 47.8 ± 66.0 mg/L vs 13.05 ± 27.7 mg/L, respectively, P = 0.0063). The combination of CRP level above 3.12 mg/L and PPM growth in BAL was observed in 89.2% of patients with exacerbation compared with only 52.3% of patients without exacerbation (P = 0.0031).

CONCLUSIONS

ABC is common in severe COPD patients undergoing BLVR, and along with elevated CRP level both are associated with high risk of immediate post-procedural COPD exacerbation. These patients should be identified, carefully observed and possibly benefit from prophylactic microbiologically directed antibiotic treatment.

Bronchoscopic interventions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Over the past decade, several non-surgical and minimally invasive bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) techniques have been developed to treat patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). BLVR can be significantly efficacious, suitable for a broad cohort of patients, and associated with a solid safety profile at a reasonable expense. The introduction of BLVR is also expected to accelerate the further development of interventional pulmonology worldwide. Recently, results from clinical studies on BLVR techniques have been published, providing valuable information about the procedure's indications, contraindications, patient-selection criterion and outcomes. BLVR utilizing one-way endobronchial valves is gaining momentum as an accepted treatment in regular medical practice because of the identification of best responders. Patients with a heterogeneous emphysema distribution and without inter-lobar collateral ventilation show encouraging results. Furthermore, for patients with collateral ventilation, who are not considered candidates for valve treatment, and for patients with homogeneous emphysema, the introduction of lung volume reduction coil treatment is a promising solution. Moreover, with the development of newer treatment modalities, that is, biochemical sealant and thermal water vapor, the potential to treat emphysema irrespective of collateral flow, may be further increased. Nevertheless, patient selection for BLVR treatment will be crucial for the procedure's success and should be performed using a multidisciplinary team approach. Consequently, BLVR needs to be concentrated in high-volume centres that will offer better quality and experience with treatment challenges and adverse events. This review gives a general overview of BLVR from an expert and scientific perspective.

The lung volume reduction coil for the treatment of emphysema: a new therapy in development

Lung volume reduction (LVR) coil treatment is a novel therapy for patients with severe emphysema. In this bilateral bronchoscopic treatment, approximately 10 LVR coils per lobe are delivered under fluoroscopic guidance in two sequential procedures. The LVR coil reduces lung volume by compressing the most destructed areas of the lung parenchyma and restores the lung elastic recoil. Both patients with upper- and lower-lobe predominant emphysema as well as a homogeneous emphysema distribution can be treated. LVR coil treatment results in an improvement of pulmonary function, exercise tolerance and quality of life. The LVR-coil treatment has been evaluated in several European clinical trials since 2008 and received CE mark approval in 2010. Currently, two large multicenter randomized controlled trials are underway in Europe and North America to assess the efficacy and safety of the LVR-coil treatment at 12 months compared with usual care. In this review, we share our experience with the LVR-coil treatment.

Noninvasive ventilation and lung volume reduction

As parenchymal lung disease in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease becomes increasingly severe there is a diminishing prospect of drug therapies conferring clinically useful benefit. Lung volume reduction surgery is effective in patients with heterogenous upper zone emphysema and reduced exercise tolerance, and is probably underused. Rapid progress is being made in nonsurgical approaches to lung volume reduction, but use outside specialized centers cannot be recommended presently. Noninvasive ventilation given to patients with acute hypercapnic exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease reduces mortality and morbidity, but the place of chronic non-invasive ventilatory support remains more controversial.

Efficacy of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: a meta-analysis

Background

Over the last several years, the morbidity, mortality, and high costs associated with lung volume reduction (LVR) surgery has fuelled the development of different methods for bronchoscopic LVR (BLVR) in patients with emphysema. In this meta-analysis, we sought to study and compare the efficacy of most of these methods.

Methods

Eligible studies were retrieved from PubMed and Embase for the following BLVR methods: one-way valves, sealants (BioLVR), LVR coils, airway bypass stents, and bronchial thermal vapor ablation. Primary study outcomes included the mean change post-intervention in the lung function tests, the 6-minute walk distance, and the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included treatment-related complications.

Results

Except for the airway bypass stents, all other methods of BLVR showed efficacy in primary outcomes. However, in comparison, the BioLVR method showed the most significant findings and was the least associated with major treatment-related complications. For the BioLVR method, the mean change in forced expiratory volume (in first second) was 0.18 L (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.09 to 0.26; P<0.001); in 6-minute walk distance was 23.98 m (95% CI: 12.08 to 35.88; P<0.01); and in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire was -8.88 points (95% CI: −12.12 to −5.64; P<0.001).

Conclusion

The preliminary findings of our meta-analysis signify the importance of most methods of BLVR. The magnitude of the effect on selected primary outcomes shows noninfe-riority, if not equivalence, when compared to what is known for surgical LVR.

Advances in interventional pulmonology

Interventional pulmonology (IP) remains a rapidly expanding and evolving subspecialty focused on the diagnosis and treatment of complex diseases of the thorax. As the field continues to push the leading edge of medical technology, new procedures allow for novel minimally invasive approaches to old diseases including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and metastatic or primary lung malignancy. In addition to technologic advances, IP has matured into a defined subspecialty, requiring formal training necessary to perform the advanced procedures. This need for advanced training has led to the need for standardization of training and the institution of a subspecialty board examination. In this review, we will discuss the dynamic field of IP as well as novel technologies being investigated or employed in the treatment of thoracic disease.

Two-year follow-up in patients treated with emphysematous lung sealant for advanced emphysema

Endoscopic lung volume-reduction therapy for emphysema has been associated with therapeutic responses smaller in magnitude and less durable than surgical volume reduction (LVRS). Bronchoscopic emphysematous lung sealant (ELS) therapy has been shown to produce improvements in pulmonary function similar to surgery at 1 year. This case series summarizes safety and efficacy data of all patients from the initial ELS study out to 2 years. Between 1 and 2 years, there were three all-cause adverse events requiring hospitalization. One patient went on to successful lung transplant. Improvements relative to baseline in spirometry (change in FEV1: + 14.3 ± 33.1%; change in FVC: + 5.8 ± 23.2%) and diffusing capacity (change in diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide: + 10.6 ± 20.6%) were observed at 2 years. An exponential model fit to FEV₁ data at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months predicted improvements from a baseline of > 5% out to 4.1 years, similar to what has been reported following surgery. This report confirms long-term safety and efficacy following ELS therapy in advanced emphysema. Studies in a larger cohort are needed to define the role of ELS therapy in the treatment algorithm of patients with this condition.