Improved diagnostic sensitivity of bronchsocopy for the investigation of peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs) with the use of radial probe endobroncial ultrasound (EBUS) has been reported, although diagnostic performance varies considerably.A systematic review of published literature evaluating radial probe EBUS accuracy was performed to determine point sensitivity and specificity, and to construct a summary receiver-operating characteristic curve. Sub-group analysis and linear regression was used to identify possible sources of study heterogeneity.16 studies with 1,420 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria. Significant inter-study variation in EBUS method was noted. EBUS had point specificity of 1.00 (95% CI 0.99–1.00) and point sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI 0.70–0.76) for the detection of lung cancer, with a positive likelihood ratio of 26.84 (12.60–57.20) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.28 (0.23–0.36). Significant inter-study heterogeneity for sensitivity was observed, with prevalence of malignancy, lesion size and reference standard used being possible sources.EBUS is a safe and relatively accurate tool in the investigation of PPLs. Diagnostic sensitivity of EBUS may be influenced by the prevalence of malignancy in the patient cohort being examined and lesion size. Further methodologically rigorous studies on well-defined patient populations are required to evaluate the generalisability of our results.

Rationale: Conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) and endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-TBNA are widely accepted tools for the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer and the initial procedure of choice for staging. Obtaining adequate specimens is key to provide a specific histologic and molecular diagnosis of lung cancer. Objectives: To develop practice guidelines on the acquisition and preparation of conventional TBNA and EBUS-TBNA specimens for the diagnosis and molecular testing of (suspected) lung cancer. We hope to improve the global unification of procedure standards, maximize the yield and identify areas for research. Methods: Systematic electronic database searches were conducted to identify relevant studies for inclusion in the guideline [PubMed and the Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews)]. Main Results: The number of needle aspirations with both conventional TBNA and EBUS-TBNA was found to impact the diagnostic yield, with at least 3 passes needed for optimal performance. Neither needle gauge nor the use of miniforceps, the use of suction or the type of sedation/anesthesia has been found to improve the diagnostic yield for lung cancer. The use of rapid on-site cytology examination does not increase the diagnostic yield. Molecular analysis (i.e. EGFR, KRAS and ALK) can be routinely performed on the majority of cytological samples obtained by EBUS-TBNA and conventional TBNA. There does not appear to be a superior method for specimen preparation (i.e. slide staining, cell blocks or core tissue). It is likely that optimal specimen preparation may vary between institutions depending on the expertise of pathology colleagues.

Background: Advanced diagnostic bronchoscopy targeting the lung periphery has developed at an accelerated pace over the last two decades, whereas evidence to support introduction of innovative technologies has been variable and deficient. A major gap relates to variable reporting of diagnostic yield, in addition to limited comparative studies. Objectives: To develop a research framework to standardize the evaluation of advanced diagnostic bronchoscopy techniques for peripheral lung lesions. Specifically, we aimed for consensus on a robust definition of diagnostic yield, and we propose potential study designs at various stages of technology development. Methods: Panel members were selected for their diverse expertise. Workgroup meetings were conducted in virtual or hybrid format. The cochairs subsequently developed summary statements, with voting proceeding according to a modified Delphi process. The statement was cosponsored by the American Thoracic Society and the American College of Chest Physicians. Results: Consensus was reached on 15 statements on the definition of diagnostic outcomes and study designs. A strict definition of diagnostic yield should be used, and studies should be reported according to the STARD (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) guidelines. Clinical or radiographic follow-up may be incorporated into the reference standard definition but should not be used to calculate diagnostic yield from the procedural encounter. Methodologically robust comparative studies, with incorporation of patient-reported outcomes, are needed to adequately assess and validate minimally invasive diagnostic technologies targeting the lung periphery. Conclusions: This American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians statement aims to provide a research framework that allows greater standardization of device validation efforts through clearly defined diagnostic outcomes and robust study designs. High-quality studies, both industry and publicly funded, can support subsequent health economic analyses and guide implementation decisions in various healthcare settings.