ERJ open research · 2023
Assessment of efficacy and safety of endoscopic lung volume reduction with one-way valves in patients with a very low FEV1.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sgarbossa Thomas, Lenga Pavlina, Stanzel Franz, Holland Angelique, Grah Christian, Gesierich Wolfgang, Gebhardt Andreas, Ficker Joachim, Eggeling Stephan, Andreas Stefan, Schmidt Bernd, Eisenmann Stephan, Schwick Björn, Franke Karl-Josef, Fertl Andreas, Witzenrath Martin, Hübner Ralf-Harto
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) with one-way valves produces beneficial outcomes in patients with severe emphysema. Evidence on the efficacy remains unclear in patients with a very low forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (≤20% predicted). We aim to compare clinical outcomes of ELVR, in relation to the FEV1 restriction.
METHODS: All data originated from the German Lung Emphysema Registry (Lungenemphysem Register), which is a prospective multicentric observational study for patients with severe emphysema after lung volume reduction. Two groups were formed at baseline: FEV1 ≤20% pred and FEV1 21-45% pred. Pulmonary function tests (FEV1, residual volume, partial pressure of carbon dioxide), training capacity (6-min walk distance (6MWD)), quality of life (modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (mMRC), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)) and adverse events were assessed and compared at baseline and after 3 and 6 months.
RESULTS: 33 patients with FEV1 ≤20% pred and 265 patients with FEV1 21-45% pred were analysed. After ELVR, an increase in FEV1 was observed in both groups (both p<0.001). The mMRC and CAT scores, and 6MWD improved in both groups (all p<0.05). The SGRQ score improved significantly in the FEV1 21-45% pred group, and by trend in the FEV1 ≤20% pred group. Pneumothorax was the most frequent complication within the first 90 days in both groups (FEV1 ≤20% pred: 7.7% versus FEV1 21-45% pred: 22.1%; p=0.624). No deaths occurred in the FEV1 ≤20% pred group up to 6 months.
CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the potential efficacy of one-way valves, even in patients with very low FEV1, as these patients experienced significant improvements in FEV1, 6MWD and quality of life. No death was reported, suggesting a good safety profile, even in these high-risk patients.
METHODS: All data originated from the German Lung Emphysema Registry (Lungenemphysem Register), which is a prospective multicentric observational study for patients with severe emphysema after lung volume reduction. Two groups were formed at baseline: FEV1 ≤20% pred and FEV1 21-45% pred. Pulmonary function tests (FEV1, residual volume, partial pressure of carbon dioxide), training capacity (6-min walk distance (6MWD)), quality of life (modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (mMRC), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)) and adverse events were assessed and compared at baseline and after 3 and 6 months.
RESULTS: 33 patients with FEV1 ≤20% pred and 265 patients with FEV1 21-45% pred were analysed. After ELVR, an increase in FEV1 was observed in both groups (both p<0.001). The mMRC and CAT scores, and 6MWD improved in both groups (all p<0.05). The SGRQ score improved significantly in the FEV1 21-45% pred group, and by trend in the FEV1 ≤20% pred group. Pneumothorax was the most frequent complication within the first 90 days in both groups (FEV1 ≤20% pred: 7.7% versus FEV1 21-45% pred: 22.1%; p=0.624). No deaths occurred in the FEV1 ≤20% pred group up to 6 months.
CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the potential efficacy of one-way valves, even in patients with very low FEV1, as these patients experienced significant improvements in FEV1, 6MWD and quality of life. No death was reported, suggesting a good safety profile, even in these high-risk patients.