About this item:

476 Views | 431 Downloads

Author Notes:

Correspondence: Imran H Iftikhar, One Medical Park, Suite 300, Columbia, SC 29203, USA, Tel +1 803 873 3193, Fax +1 803-454-2682, Email: imran.iftikhar@uscmed.sc.edu

AIM was/is an investigator on the Spiration pivotal study (co-principal investigator), Aeris trial (principal investigator), EASE trial (principal investigator), and PneumRx trial (principal investigator).

The authors would like to make a correction to the Disclosure statement. The corrected statement is as follows:

IHI and FRM report no potential conflicts of interest with any companies/organizations whose products or services may be discussed in this article. AIM was/is an investigator on the Spiration pivotal study (co-principal investigator), Aeris trial (principal investigator), EASE trial (principal investigator). None of the authors report any funding source for this work.

The authors would also like to inform the readers that the first line of the paragraph under the sub-heading “Search strategy and selection criteria”, on page 482 should read as: We searched PubMed and Embase databases from their inception to June 6, 2013 (the search for one way valves and BTVA ended by June 6, 2013, and the search for lung sealants/BioLVR and LVRC/Coils ended by April 30, 2013).

Subjects:

Keywords:

  • coils
  • emphysema
  • endobronchial valves
  • sealants
  • stents
  • Bronchoscopy
  • Exercise Therapy
  • Exercise Tolerance
  • Forced Expiratory Volume
  • Humans
  • Lung
  • Lung Volume Measurements
  • Pneumonectomy
  • Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
  • Pulmonary Emphysema
  • Recovery of Function
  • Stents
  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Walking

Efficacy of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: A meta-analysis

Tools:

Journal Title:

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Volume:

Volume 9

Publisher:

, Pages 481-491

Type of Work:

Article | Final Publisher PDF

Abstract:

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 noninferiority, if not equivalence, when compared to what is known for surgical LVR.

Copyright information:

© 2014 Iftikhar et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited.

This is an Open Access work distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

Creative Commons License

Export to EndNote