Bronchoscopic Thermal Vapor Ablation (BTVA) in patients with severe upper lobe predominant emphysema: 36 months follow-up results from a prospective registry
Résumé fourni par la source
Background: Targeted BTVA can lead to lung volume reduction. Previous data from a prospective RCT demonstrated lung function (PFTs) and quality of life improvements. This study looks at the longer-term effects of BTVA with regard to PFTs, exercise capacity, and QoL from an ongoing international registry. Methods: Data from 10 clinical sites were analysed. Measurements included FEV1, RV, 6-MWT and SGRQ prior to treatment and up to 36months (M) later. 204 treated patients (age 64.4 ± 6.81 yrs; FEV1 30.2 ± 8.33 % pred) undergoing 314 BTVA procedures from 05/2017 to 01/2023 were included. Missing data were not inputed. Results: Of the 204 patients, 116 underwent 12M-Follow-up (FU), 63 24M-FU, and 42 patients 36M-FU. In a total of 314 BTVA procedures, 97 procedure-related serious adverse events (SAEs), amongst them 26 COPD exacerbations, 30 pneumonias, 6 haemoptysis, were reported. 28 out of a total of 46 severe SAEs resolved without sequelae. Statistically significant improvements for SGRQ and RV were observed at 12M (SGRQ, RV) and 24M (SGRQ). Changes in FEV1 and 6-MWT did not achieve statistical significance. Conclusions: FU of patients treated with BTVA in a real-world cohort. The data show safety and improvements in some COPD outcomes at 12M and 24M, however, waning treatment effects during longer-term FU.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Bronchoscopic Thermal Vapor Ablation (BTVA) in patients with severe upper lobe predominant emphysema: 36 months follow-up results from a prospective registry
- Date Crossref
- 09/09/2023
- Éditeur
- European Respiratory Society
- Type
- proceedings-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.