Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

From the authors

P. Vilmann, S. S. Larsen
European Respiratory Journal 2006 27: 239-240; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00107705
P. Vilmann
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. S. Larsen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

We read with interest the letter to the Editors by J. Janssen and coworkers regarding our editorial comment on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA), which was featured in the March issue of the European Respiratory Journal 1.

Our comment resumes the present status concerning EUS-FNA in the chest 1. All available studies indicate that EUS-FNA is promising in lung cancer (LC) staging. However, as stated several times in our comment, final conclusions have to await large blinded, randomised comparative studies. So, what do we do in the mean time when dealing with the major cancer-related cause of death with a terrible prognosis, which is almost unchanged during the past 40 yrs?

Concerning the right paratracheal regions (2R+4R), we agree that these regions are not as easily accessible by EUS-FNA when compared with the left-sided mediastinal regions. At present, mediastinoscopy (MS) may be the best method for these regions. According to our experience, an important number of patients with 2–4R disease can be diagnosed with advanced inoperable disease by EUS-FNA 2.

With regards to transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) biopsy, we do agree that the results of this minimally invasive method should not be neglected and TBNA should be performed during initial bronchoscopy in patients suspected of LC. Only patients considered as surgical candidates after TBNA should undergo further invasive staging. That is the current practice at our centre and, we suppose, most other centres. However, in spite of TBNA and MS, ∼40% of intended curative operations for LC are either explorative without resection or followed by recurrence. This is due to undetected advanced disease prior to surgery. Therefore, new and minimally invasive methods are needed to improve LC staging.

In this context, we found EUS-FNA promising. As EUS-FNA is less invasive, has fewer complications and does not require general anaesthesia, we suggest that EUS-FNA is performed as the initial invasive staging modality after bronchoscopy plus TBNA.

Since the publication of our editorial comment, two further prospective studies have investigated the addition of EUS-FNA to a standard work-up for unselected LC patients 3, 4. In one of these studies, the results of EUS-FNA were blinded 3. The conclusions were clear; EUS-FNA, when added to MS (and TBNA), improves the pre-operative staging of LC, resulting in a reduced rate of futile thoracotomies.

How much additional proof do we need? Should we ask for more evidence from new less invasive methods that exists for the standard methods? When is the right time to change or add to standards? We believe, based on the current literature, that the time has come for EUS-FNA.

However, the aim of our editorial comment was not to claim the superiority of one method above the other, but to inform thoracic specialists that, according to the available evidence, the addition of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration to a standard work-up improves selection of surgically curable patients with lung cancer.

    • © ERS Journals Ltd

    References

    1. ↵
      Vilmann P, Larsen SS. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy in the chest: little to lose, much to gain. Eur Respir J 2005;25:400–401.
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    2. ↵
      Larsen SS, Vilman P, Krasnik M, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy versus mediastinoscopy for analysis of paratracheal and subcarinal lymph nodes in lung cancer staging. Lung Cancer 2005;48:85–92.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. ↵
      Annema JT, Versteegh MI, Veselic M, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound added to mediastinoscopy for preoperative staging of patients with lung cancer. JAMA 2005;294:931–936.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    4. ↵
      Larsen SS, Vilman P, Krasnik M, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided biopsy performed routinely in lung cancer staging spares futile thoracotomies: preliminary results from a randomised clinical trial. Lung Cancer 2005;49:377–385.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    View this article with LENS
    Vol 27 Issue 1 Table of Contents
    European Respiratory Journal: 27 (1)
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by author
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    From the authors
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Print
    Citation Tools
    From the authors
    P. Vilmann, S. S. Larsen
    European Respiratory Journal Jan 2006, 27 (1) 239-240; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00107705

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero

    Share
    From the authors
    P. Vilmann, S. S. Larsen
    European Respiratory Journal Jan 2006, 27 (1) 239-240; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00107705
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Full Text (PDF)

    Jump To

    • Article
      • References
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    More in this TOC Section

    • Risk factors for disease progression in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
    • Optimised surveillance of bronchial dysplasia in risky population
    • Reply: Risk factors for disease progression in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
    Show more Correspondence

    Related Articles

    Navigate

    • Home
    • Current issue
    • Archive

    About the ERJ

    • Journal information
    • Editorial board
    • Reviewers
    • Press
    • Permissions and reprints
    • Advertising

    The European Respiratory Society

    • Society home
    • myERS
    • Privacy policy
    • Accessibility

    ERS publications

    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS books online
    • ERS Bookshop

    Help

    • Feedback

    For authors

    • Instructions for authors
    • Publication ethics and malpractice
    • Submit a manuscript

    For readers

    • Alerts
    • Subjects
    • Podcasts
    • RSS

    Subscriptions

    • Accessing the ERS publications

    Contact us

    European Respiratory Society
    442 Glossop Road
    Sheffield S10 2PX
    United Kingdom
    Tel: +44 114 2672860
    Email: journals@ersnet.org

    ISSN

    Print ISSN:  0903-1936
    Online ISSN: 1399-3003

    Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society