Endobronchial Valves Therapy for Advanced Emphysema: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. Issue 2 (April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Low, See-Wei; Lee, Justin Z.; Desai, Hem; Hsu, Chiu-Hsieh; Sam, Afshin R.; Knepler, James L.
• Is Part Of: Journal of bronchology & interventional pulmonology. Volume 26:Issue 2(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-04
• Subjects: bronchoscope -- endobronchial valves (EBV) -- emphysema -- bronchoscopic lung volume reduction; Bronchoscopy -- Periodicals; Lungs -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Respiratory Tract Diseases -- Periodicals; Lung Diseases -- surgery -- Periodicals; Diagnostic Techniques, Respiratory System -- Periodicals; Bronchi; Bronchoscopy; Lungs -- Diseases; Periodicals; 616.23
• DOI: 10.1097/LBR.0000000000000527
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1944-6586

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Trials suggest that bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) with endobronchial valve (EBV) implantation may produce similar effects as lung volume reduction surgery, by inducing atelectasis and reducing hyperinflation through a minimally invasive procedure. This study sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of BLVR with EBV for advanced emphysema. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials comparing EBV implantation versus standard medical treatment or sham bronchoscopy. The main outcome of interest was the percentage change of forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Results: Data analyzed from 5 randomized controlled trials with 703 patients revealed improvement in percentage change of forced expiratory volume in 1 second in EBV group compared with control group [weighted mean difference (WMD)=11.43; 95% confidence interval (CI), 6.05-16.80; P <0.0001] and improvement in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (WMD=−5.69; 95% CI, −8.67 to −2.70; P =0.0002). There is no difference shown in the 6-minute walking test (WMD=14.12; 95% CI, −4.71 to 32.95; P =0.14). The overall complication rate of EBV was not significantly different except for an increased rate of pneumothorax [relative risk (RR)=8.16; 95% CI, 2.21-30.11; P =0.002), any hemoptysis (RR=5.01; 95% CI, 1.12-22.49; P =0.04)] and valve migration (RR=8.64; 95% CI, 2.01-37.13; P =0.004). Conclusion: BLVR using EBV shows short-term improvement in lung function and quality of life, but with increased risk of minor hemoptysis, pneumothorax, and valve migration. Follow-up data on the studies are needed to determine its long-term efficacy.