• Users Online: 99
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 41-49

How was the management of patients scheduled for surgical biopsy through a multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases? Was a pathological diagnosis alone enough?


1 Department of Pulmonology, University of Health Sciences Istanbul Sureyyapasa Chest Diseases and Thoracic, Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
2 Department of Thoracic Surgery, University of Health Sciences Istanbul Sureyyapasa Chest Diseases and Thoracic, Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
3 Department of Radiology, Istanbul Florence Nightingale Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
4 Department of Pathology, University of Health Sciences Istanbul Sureyyapasa Chest Diseases and Thoracic, Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
Meltem Agca
Department of Pulmonology, University of Health Sciences Istanbul Sureyyapasa Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ejop.ejop_67_20

Rights and Permissions

OBJECTIVE: The present study examines the clinical and radiological findings and pathological diagnoses of patients undergoing surgical biopsy with an multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision and investigates whether final diagnoses change on the reevaluated of pathological diagnoses at MDT meetings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 416 patients were discussed at MDT meetings held at the University of Health Sciences Istanbul Sureyyapasa Chest Diseases and Thoracic, Surgery Training and Research Hospital January between January 2016 and May 2019, with surgical biopsy decisions made for 50 (12%) patients. RESULTS: Among the 50 patients, 26 (52%) were female, with a mean age of 53 ± 12 years. The most common locations of the surgical biopsy were the right lung (n = 27, 54%), lower lobe (n = 38, 76%) and single lobe (n = 35, 70%). A definitive pathological diagnosis was established in 41 (82%) patients following the biopsy. The most common diagnoses were usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP; n = 19, 38%), sarcoidosis (n = 11, 22%), unclassifiable fibrosis (n = 9, 18%), (non-specific interstitial pneumonia; n = 5, 10%), (hypersensitivity pneumonitis; n = 2, 4%) and others (n = 4, 8%), respectively. Diagnoses of 13 (26%) such patients were revised. The revision was most common in the unclassifiable fibrosis and UIP subgroups. The radiological appearance was classified based on the high-resolution computed tomography parameters for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). The final diagnosis was IPF in eight of 14 patients with “probable” diagnoses, all four patients with “indeterminate” diagnoses and three of the 28 patients with “alternative” diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Diagnosing interstitial lung diseases is difficult, and while surgical biopsy provides the most definitive diagnosis, it is not enough by itself. IPF may vary in radiology. Patients diagnosed with UIP and unclassifiable fibrosis after biopsy should be reevaluated, and the final diagnosis should be established through a multidisciplinary approach.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed215    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded46    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal