摘要
Research questions. How does a virtual bronchoscopy navigation system (VBNS) improve prediction of candidate bronchus across a range of doctors investigating a range of lesions with Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) guide sheath? To what extent do benefits of virtual bronchoscopic pre-procedure navigation apply to experienced versus inexperienced bron- choscopists? Methods: Using archived EBUS Guide sheath cases, a comparison was made between identified candidate 4th order bronchus by Computerised tomography (CT) evaluation versus that identified after virtual path creation. Results: From 7 archived cases, 14 doctors identified the correct bronchus in 94 of 98 assessments (95%). Percentage of cases where there was an improvement in localisation by 2 or more 4th order bronchi was 39.8% overall (28.6% – 51.0%), 26.6 for experienced and 53.1 for inexperienced bronchoscopists (p < 0.02). The absolute mean number of 4th order bronchi different between CT and VBNS was 2.0 ± 2.6 overall, 1.2 (range 0-6) for experienced, and 2.8 (range 0-11) for inexperienced bronchoscopists. Virtual Path software calculation time was 8.1 ± 2.7 minutes, compared to 3.6 ± 2.1 minutes by CT. Conclusion: VBNS allowed rapid accurate assessment with minimal software training. Greatest benefits in reduction of procedure time were obtained in inexperienced bronchoscopists, and VBNS could allow more rapid skill development in EBUS GS in these doctors.
Research questions. How does a virtual bronchoscopy navigation system (VBNS) improve prediction of candidate bronchus across a range of doctors investigating a range of lesions with Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) guide sheath? To what extent do benefits of virtual bronchoscopic pre-procedure navigation apply to experienced versus inexperienced bron- choscopists? Methods: Using archived EBUS Guide sheath cases, a comparison was made between identified candidate 4th order bronchus by Computerised tomography (CT) evaluation versus that identified after virtual path creation. Results: From 7 archived cases, 14 doctors identified the correct bronchus in 94 of 98 assessments (95%). Percentage of cases where there was an improvement in localisation by 2 or more 4th order bronchi was 39.8% overall (28.6% – 51.0%), 26.6 for experienced and 53.1 for inexperienced bronchoscopists (p < 0.02). The absolute mean number of 4th order bronchi different between CT and VBNS was 2.0 ± 2.6 overall, 1.2 (range 0-6) for experienced, and 2.8 (range 0-11) for inexperienced bronchoscopists. Virtual Path software calculation time was 8.1 ± 2.7 minutes, compared to 3.6 ± 2.1 minutes by CT. Conclusion: VBNS allowed rapid accurate assessment with minimal software training. Greatest benefits in reduction of procedure time were obtained in inexperienced bronchoscopists, and VBNS could allow more rapid skill development in EBUS GS in these doctors.
