|
|
||||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Klinikum Innenstadt, Medizinische Klinik, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
Correspondence to: Hubert Hautmann, MD, Klinikum Innenstadt Medizinische Klinik, Ziemssenstr.1, D-80336 München, Germany; e-mail: hautmann{at}medinn.med.uni-muenchen.de
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Design: One hundred twenty-six balloon dilatation procedures were performed in 78 patients with predominantly bronchial carcinoma. BBD was only performed when alternative modes of local treatment (eg, laser therapy or stent implantation) were not indicated or were inappropriate. Indications were symptomatic stenoses of the tracheobronchial tree: dyspnea or stridor (52%), retention pneumonia (15%), atelectasis (10%), retention of secretions (21%), or lung abscess (2%).
Results: Fifty-five percent of all procedures consisted of dilatations of tracheal or bronchial lesions (group 1). In 22% of procedures, a stent was dilated (group 2). In 13%, BBD was used to facilitate stent placement (group 3), and in 10% to enable the correct positioning of irradiation probes for brachytherapy (group 4). In group 1 and group 2, 2 of 2 lung abscesses resolved, 5 of 8 atelectases resolved, and 11 of 12 retention pneumonias resolved. Dyspnea improved in only 12 of 32 patients. No abscess recurred. Two pneumonias and two atelectases reappeared due to restenosis. Stent implantation and brachytherapy procedures were facilitated in 90% of cases. In 52% of cases, BBD was supported by high-frequency jet ventilation. Complications consisted of one fatal hemoptysis caused by a lacerated pulmonary artery, and minor bleeding not necessitating specific therapy.
Conclusions: Fiberoptic BBD is useful in the management of airway stents prior to and postimplantation, as well as in the placement of brachytherapy catheters. BBD is also successful in the resolution of poststenotic lung abscesses, retention pneumonias, and atelectases.
Key Words: balloon catheter balloon dilatation bronchial carcinoma bronchial disease bronchial stenosis bronchoplasty bronchoscopy interventional bronchoscopy
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this article, we discuss 126 balloon dilatations of tracheobronchial stenoses in patients with malignant disease, performed primarily under local anesthesia and using flexible bronchoscopes exclusively. The objective was to evaluate indications, safety, and long-term results of fiberoptic BBD in the treatment of malignant disease.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Indications
Indications for interventional procedures were bronchial or
tracheal stenoses, which had led to specific symptoms such as dyspnea
or stridor (52%), retention pneumonia (15%), atelectasis (10%),
retention of secretions (21%), or lung abscess (2%). Criteria for
performing BBD instead of equally available alternative therapies, such
as laser therapy, cryotherapy, or stent implantation, are listed in
Table 1
. Primarily exophytic stenoses were only dilated in preparation for
self-expandable metal stents and when ablative therapies were
contraindicated (eg, laser therapy in long and confusing
stenoses with the risk of bronchial rupture). The indications for the
dilatation of stents were insufficient unfolding of the prosthesis
during placement or relevant compression by extrinsic tumor growth.
Chemotherapy or radiotherapy were not considered alternative forms of
treatment, since the onset of the therapeutic effect is delayed. In
general, BBD was only performed when other interventional modes of
therapy were either not indicated or when they could not have been
successfully completed without the supporting role of BBD. BBD was
repeated when a recurring stenosis was again symptomatic or when the
recurrence of a stenosis was observed at follow-up bronchoscopy.
|
|
|
After endoscopic evaluation, skin markers specifying the limits of the stenosis were attached by means of fluoroscopy. A flexible, 0.035-inch guidewire (Meditech; Boston Scientific; Watertown, MA) was inserted through the bronchoscope and passed through the lesion. The bronchoscope was then withdrawn. Under fluoroscopic guidance, the balloon was advanced over the guidewire, approximately 1.0 cm beyond the distal limit of the stenosis.
We used regular PTA dilatation catheters (Cordis; Roden, The Netherlands, and Microvasive; Belmont, MA). The balloons had diameters of 4 to 18 mm and varying lengths of 20 mm or 40 mm. Generally, three balloon insufflations were performed for 10 to 30 s at 3 to 5 atm during each procedure. The balloon was insufflated with diluted water-soluble contrast medium (iopromide), allowing accurate control of the balloon position during dilatation. When the extent of the stenosis was greater then the length of the balloon, the stenosis was dilated in two or more stages, advancing the balloon toward the proximal margin of the stenosis. For dilatation of stents (Wallstent, Tantalum-Strecker-Stent, Nitinol-Stent; Boston Scientific, Watertown, MA), the balloon diameter chosen did not exceed the nominal stent diameter.
Lung Function Studies
Lung function studies were recorded before and after BBD,
including FEV1, peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR),
FVC, airway resistance (Bodyscreen; Jaeger; Würzburg, Germany),
and arterial blood gas tensions (ABL500; Radiometer; Copenhagen,
Denmark). Lung function data obtained within 72 h before and after
BBD, respectively, were available for 42 patients.
Follow-up
Objective and subjective ventilatory function, radiographic
imaging, and bronchoscopic findings determined the clinical success of
BBD. In many procedures, bronchography was available before and after
dilatation to assess lumen differences. Follow-up bronchoscopies were
performed routinely every 12 to 24 weeks or when specific symptoms
emerged. Patients who could not be followed up by bronchoscopy were not
evaluated. Follow-up time ended when BBD was repeated within the same
lesion or when an alternative means of local therapy other than
BBD was initiated. BBD was considered successful when, at the time of
evaluation, the grade of the stenosis still showed improvement.
Statistical Analysis
Lung function data are expressed as means ± SD. For
comparison of two means, we used the Wilcoxon test for paired samples
or the Student t test for paired samples, depending on the
distribution. All p values were two sided, and a p value < 0.05 was
considered significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Immediate Results of BBD
Table 3
displays the results immediately after BBD as judged by bronchoscopy.
Seventy-nine percent of all stenoses improved in diameter. In group 3
and in group 4, 90% of BBD procedures were successful. Only in one
patient did the stenosis appear so rigid and twisted that a Nitinol
stent failed to unfold adequately even after the subsequent stent
dilatation. In two patients, the brachytherapy catheter could still not
be passed through the dilated stenosis. These stenoses were each
located within the right upper lobe bronchus. Stent dilatations (group
2) revealed somewhat better immediate results than nonstented stenoses
(group 1). Markedly better immediate results were achieved when we look
at subgroups of group 1 with exclusively fibrous stenoses or stenoses
pretreated with external and endoluminal radiotherapy (Table 4
). When a stent was dilated immediately after implantation due to
incomplete unfolding, BBD was successful in four of five patients. Lung
function analysis demonstrated a small but significant increase in
FEV1, PEFR, FEV1/FVC, and
PaO2 within 72 h after BBD
(Table 5
). Best results were achieved in stenoses of the trachea or singular
airways. The improvement in the grade of the stenosis, however, did not
always correlate with changes in FEV1
(r = 0.69; p = 0.24)
|
|
|
|
Complications
There was one fatal event during dilatation of a subtotal tumor
stenosis of the left main bronchus that led to massive hemoptysis with
subsequent asphyxia. Autopsy revealed laceration of a pulmonary artery
branch that was surrounded and infiltrated by a massive tumor mass.
Minor bleeding was observed in 41 patients, but did not necessitate
specific therapy. In order to ensure adequate oxygenation, 52% of the
dilatations were supported by HFJV. In 86% of these patients, IV
sedation with propofol and alfentanil was additionally applied. Apart
from two cases of bronchospasm with succeeding hypoxemia (arterial
oxygen saturations of 71% and 74%, respectively) that necessitated
treatment with inhaled ß-agonists, no other complications
occurred. Septic shock was the cause of death in one patient 5
days after BBD with stent implantation, but was not related to BBD. In
this patient, repeated stent obstruction by viscous mucus prevented
drainage and resolution of a retention pneumonia. At the time of data
analysis, 20 patients (26%) were alive. In all other patients, minimum
survival time after BBD was 25 days (mean, 126 days; range, 25 to 983
days).
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We performed 126 balloon dilatations in malignant obstructions. This report focuses specifically on the technique of flexible bronchoscopy since it is used by an increasing number of bronchologists. Of course, gentle mechanical dilation of airways using rigid bronchoscopes has been performed successfully in the past24 ; however, some authors16 still use a balloon for dilatation even when a rigid bronchoscope is in place. Furthermore, the flexible method is particularly advantageous, eg, for use in areas not accessible by a rigid bronchoscope or in the dilatation of stents to prevent dislocation.
We found three situations where BBD was useful in the management of malignant tracheobronchial stenoses. One is the preparation of stenoses for endobronchial stent placement allowing for easier insertion and unfolding of the stent. This is a well-accepted practice in endoscopic stent implantation and has been recommended by various authors.14 16 25 In high-grade stenoses, self-expanding stents cannot develop sufficient expansile force in order to achieve the desired lumen. Therefore, dilatation is a prerequisite for good results. Only in one patient did a stenosis reveal an unexpected stiffness and BBD failed to create enough airway lumen for successful stent placement. The same strategy applied to stents immediately after implantation. If the prosthesis did not adequately unfold, it could be opened with a balloon in order to expand to the desired diameter as well as to align with the bronchial wall.
An additional indication for BBD was in the placement of brachytherapy catheters, which was often impeded by high-grade stenotic lesions. In this case, the irradiation probe could not be placed through the stenosis, especially when the affected bronchus branched off at an unfavorable angle; BBD widened the stenosis, providing enough space for the probe to be placed within the desired bronchus. Only in two cases of upper-lobe stenoses did BBD fail to enable placement of the brachytherapy catheter when the catheter got caught in the rim of the stenosis and could not be pushed forward.
Obstructing tumor stenoses can also constitute an indication for BBD when alternative local treatment options are not desired or not possible. This is the case in extrinsic compression and complicated stenoses with uncertain anatomy, since this is a contraindication for ND-YAG laser resection or cryotherapy. Radiation therapy alone would not provide the immediate effect desired at the time of intervention, especially when poststenotic complications like pneumonias are to be treated. In the cases presented, stent implantation was problematic since the lesions were either located at the very proximal part of a main bronchus or at the orifice of an upper-lobe bronchus. In these locations, stent implantation is often problematic. In particular, the upper-lobe bronchi are often too short to allow efficient placement of a prosthetic device. The stent would have to protrude into the main bronchi in order to cover the lesion completely and to be held firmly in place. This could potentially result in the blockage of functioning airways due to retention and drying of secretions.13
When the above-mentioned conditions applied, BBD immediately improved the grade of stenosis in 79% of patients, and lung function parameters appear to substantiate this observation. However, the functional benefit was not very large, which may explain why only a few patients with dyspnea benefited from BBD. In addition, BBD provided sufficient ventilation for all lung abscesses and most retention pneumonias as well as atelectasis to resolve. The fact that in individual cases improvement in airway caliber did not always correlate with changes in lung function demonstrates that the clinical success of interventional procedures cannot be evaluated adequately by lung function alone. Specifically, peripheral stenoses are naturally not expected to have significant impact on lung function parameters. Their dilatation, however, can often solve the poststenotic problem.
Long-term results of BBD in malignant obstructions are very different from those in benign lesions. Patients with malignant lung disease often face a very limited prognosis, especially in our cohort with predominantly stage III and stage IV disease. Thus, interventional procedures are primarily of palliative character, whereas in benign stenoses, balloon dilatation is often a definitive treatment.17 BBD was most successful after combined radiotherapy. This applied especially to all fibrous stenoses, which received transcutaneous and endoluminal irradiation prior to BBD. The etiology was most likely radiation bronchitis as described previously.3 Perol et al26 found fibrous stenoses after endobronchial irradiation in 56% of cases. Even if stenoses were not of fibrous character, long-term recanalization was improved as long as combined radiotherapy was completed prior to BBD. We assume that combined irradiation results in the formation of stable, solid necrotic tumor mass around the site of the stenosis, which leads to better local control of the dilated lesion. In all other patients, long-term results of BBD alone (group 1) were poorer, although none of the successfully treated lung abscesses recurred within the follow-up time. Atelectases and retention pneumonias reappeared in only a small number of patients, due to restenoses. This indicates that, like other interventional methods, BBD has the potential to treat symptomatic stenoses with reasonable success. Restenoses are a well-known phenomenon not only in BBD, but also in laser therapy and stent placement, with the need for repeated interventions. We performed repeated dilatations in a number of patients. They were performed when a stenosis was again symptomatic, but also when follow-up bronchoscopy revealed the recurrence of a stenosis. In the latter cases, it remains unclear whether this strategy prevented the recurrence of symptoms. Therefore, we cannot generally recommend the dilatation of a restenosis in the absence of specific symptoms.
Apart from fatal hemoptysis in one patient, complications were of only minor significance and were managed safely. The case of fatal hemoptysis could be attributed to a lacerated tumor-infiltrated pulmonary artery. Dilatation was attempted in order to recanalize the left main bronchus within a large tumor mass. Although the entry of the stenosis was clearly identified and bronchography revealed normal poststenotic bronchi, the guidewire could not be advanced to the periphery of the lung. In retrospect, we assume that guidewire and balloon catheter came to lie within the tumor tissue and not within the former bronchial lumen. We therefore recommend ensuring adequate intraluminal position of the balloon catheter before inflation. It remains questionable whether rigid bronchoscopy would have prevented the fatal outcome in this patient, considering the intensity of the bleeding. In spite of this complication, we believe that fiberoptic bronchoscopy represents a safe and effective instrument for performing BBD in malignant lung disease. Additionally, HFJV can be used when the patients condition requires safe ventilation or when single airways are involved.
In conclusion, there are a number of indications for BBD. It is recommended for the restoration of airway lumen prior to endoluminal irradiation or stent placement when brachytherapy catheters or stents cannot adequately be placed. Another indication is bronchial stenoses when alternative treatment options, such as laser therapy or stent implantation, are not indicated or are inappropriate. BBD can then be used for the definitive treatment of fibrous as well as nonfibrous symptomatic airway stenoses. Only patients with dyspnea do not respond well to BBD. However, in most cases, lung abscesses, retention pneumonias, and atelectases can be successfully treated with BBD. The rate of restenoses is high. Radiotherapy prior to BBD results in superior long-term recanalization. Apart from facilitating brachytherapy and stent placement, fiberoptic BBD is also beneficial when it is restricted to the treatment of stenoses that have caused inflammatory poststenotic complications or atelectases.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Received for publication October 25, 1999. Accepted for publication January 3, 2001.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. L. Mayse, J. Greenheck, M. Friedman, and K. L. Kovitz Successful Bronchoscopic Balloon Dilation of Nonmalignant Tracheobronchial Obstruction Without Fluoroscopy Chest, August 1, 2004; 126(2): 634 - 637. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Ernst, D. Feller-Kopman, H. D. Becker, and A. C. Mehta Central Airway Obstruction Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., June 15, 2004; 169(12): 1278 - 1297. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. N. Chhajed, M. Brutsche, and M. Tamm Balloon Dilatation Using Flexible Bronchoscopy for the Management of Benign and Malignant Airway Stenoses Chest, January 1, 2004; 125(1): 354 - 355. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. A. Kvale, M. Simoff, and U. B. S. Prakash Palliative Care Chest, January 1, 2003; 123(1_suppl): 284S - 311S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. C. Flanders, C. D. Sullivan, M. Fujii, A. Sowers, M. A. Anzano, A. Arabshahi, C. Major, C. Deng, A. Russo, J. B. Mitchell, et al. Mice Lacking Smad3 Are Protected Against Cutaneous Injury Induced by Ionizing Radiation Am. J. Pathol., March 1, 2002; 160(3): 1057 - 1068. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |