In the everyday practice of respiratory physicians, ultrasound techniques play a key role by enabling several diagnostic and interventional procedures. The application of ultrasound to endoscopic procedures allows both a visualization and a guided sampling of mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes. Endobronchial ultrasound can be combined with transbronchial needle aspiration, and, similarly, endoscopic ultrasound can be combined with fine-needle aspiration to sample virtually all mediastinal nodal stations from the airways and the esophagus. Endobronchial ultrasound–transbronchial needle aspiration and endoscopic ultrasound–fine needle aspiration showed a complementary diagnostic yield, and, recently, endoscopic ultrasound with bronchoscope was introduced in clinical practice to perform a transesophageal needle aspiration by using an ultrasound bronchoscope. This technique allows a single operator to perform both transbronchial and transesophageal needle sampling with the same instrument during a single bronchoscopic procedure. Mediastinal staging impacts the management of patients affected by lung cancer, and the most recent guidelines clearly state that endobronchial ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound should be the initial tissue sampling procedure over surgical staging. In addition, endoscopic ultrasound techniques demonstrated an excellent yield in diagnosing lymphoma and benign diseases, for example, sarcoidosis. The aim of this review was to discuss the current role and future perspectives of endosonography techniques available for the evaluation of the mediastinum. Special emphasis was placed on equipment and technical aspects, the diagnostic role, and future directions of development.

Central Line-Associated BloodStream Infections (CLABSIs) are emerging challenge in Respiratory semi-Intensive Care Units (RICUs). We evaluated efficacy of educational interventions on rate of CLABSIs and effects of port protector as adjuvant tool. Study lasted 18 months (9 months of observation and 9 of intervention). We enrolled patients with central venous catheter (CVC): 1) placed during hospitalization in RICU; 2) already placed without signs of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) within 48 h after the admission; 3) already placed without evidence of microbiologic contamination of blood cultures. During interventional period we randomized patients into two groups: 1) educational intervention (Group 1) and 2) educational intervention plus port protector (Group 2). We focused on CVC-related sepsis as primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the rate of CVC colonization and CVC contamination. Eighty seven CVCs were included during observational period. CLABSIs rate was 8.4/1000 [10 sepsis (9 CLABSIs)]. We observed 17 CVC colonizations and 6 contaminations. Forty six CVCs were included during interventional period. CLABSIs rate was 1.4/1000. 21/46 CVCs were included into Group 2, in which no CLABSIs or contaminations were reported, while 2 CVC colonizations were found. Our study clearly shows that both kinds of interventions significantly reduce the rate of CLABSIs. In particular, the use of port protector combined to educational interventions gave zero CLABSIs rate. NCT03486093 [ ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier], retrospectively registered.

Background and Objective: Studies which evaluated the role of an ultrasound-guided needle aspiration biopsy (US-NAB) of metastases from lung cancer located in “superficial” organs/tissues are scant, and none of them assessed the possible impact of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) on diagnostic accuracy and safety outcomes. Methods: Consecutive patients with suspected superficial metastases from lung cancer were randomized 1:1 to US-NAB without (US-NAB group) or with ROSE (ROSE group). The diagnostic yield for a tissue diagnosis was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the diagnostic yield for cancer genotyping, the diagnostic yield for PD-L1 testing, and safety. Results: During the study period, 136 patients were randomized to receive an US-NAB with (n = 68) or without ROSE (n = 68). We found no significant differences between the ROSE group and the US-NAB group in terms of the diagnostic yields for tissue diagnosis (94.1% vs. 97%, respectively; p = 0.68), cancer genotyping (88% vs. 91.8%, respectively; p = 0.56), and PD-L1 testing (93.5% vs. 90.6%, respectively; p = 0.60). Compared to the diagnostic US-NAB procedures, the non-diagnostic procedures were characterized by less common use of a cutting needle (66.6% vs. 96.9%, respectively; p = 0.0004) and less common retrieval of a tissue core (37.5% vs. 98.5%; p = 0.0001). Only one adverse event (vasovagal syncope) was recorded. Conclusion: US-NAB of superficial metastases is safe and has an excellent diagnostic success regardless of the availability of ROSE. These findings provide a strong rationale for using US-NAB as the first-step method for tissue acquisition whenever a suspected superficial metastatic lesion is identified in patients with suspected lung cancer.

The diagnostic yield of conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) is characterized by a learning effect. The aim of this retrospective study was to verify whether a learning curve similarly affected the yield of endobronchial ultrasound-guided (EBUS)-TBNA. To this end, we evaluated the sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNA during the first 3 years of activity. EBUS-TBNA was performed by 2 operators with no previous experience in this technique. Cytologic samples were obtained from mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes enlarged at a chest computed tomography scan and/or with increased fluorodeoxyglucose uptake at computed tomography/positron emission tomography scan in patients with suspected lung cancer. The cytologic diagnosis of EBUS-TBNA samples has been compared with the final diagnosis obtained from further diagnostic procedures, surgery, or clinical-radiologic follow-up. From October 2012 to October 2015, we collected 408 EBUS-TBNA cytologic samples from 313 patients: 223 samples were positive for metastatic involvement and 185 were nonmetastatic. The latter included 137 true-negative and 48 false-negative results. The final diagnosis comprised 271 metastatic and 137 nonmetastatic lymph nodes. The overall sensitivity for cancer was 82% and diagnostic accuracy was 88%. Sensitivity and accuracy per year were as follows: first year, 78% and 82% in 90 nodal samples; second year, 83% and 89% in 144 nodal samples; third year, 85% and 91% in 174 nodal samples. EBUS-TBNA can be considered as a reliable tool even if performed by operators without previous experience in this procedure, and the diagnostic yield continues to increase progressively over a long time.