Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2025
Use of Electromagnetic Navigational Transthoracic Needle Aspiration E-TTNA for Sampling of Lung Nodules
Published on: May 23, 2015
Comparison of transbronchial biopsy techniques using needle and forceps biopsies in lung cancer for molecular
Florian Sticht1,2, Maximilian Valentin Malfertheiner3, Clemens Wiest1
1Clinic and Polyclinic of Internal Medicine, Department of Pneumology, University Hospital Regensburg, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Background:
In lung cancer, molecular testing and next-generation sequencing (NGS) are needed to identify therapeutic targets and are increasingly being used in earlier stages of the disease. Despite its longstanding use, it remains unclear whether transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) of peripheral lung lesions provides as adequate material for genetic testing as transbronchial forceps biopsies (TBFBs). In this study, we aim to analyze the use of TBNA using median viable cell area (MVCA) as a surrogate parameter to analyze sample quality.
Methods:
This prospective single-center study analyzed biopsy specimens or aspirates of patients who underwent bronchoscopy with transbronchial biopsy. Patients underwent bronchoscopy with TBFB and TBNA for suspected lung cancer in peripheral lung lesions. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either TBFB or TBNA as the first biopsy technique and then switched to the other. After routine workup, sample slides were digitally scanned, and MVCA was calculated by a pathologist blinded to the biopsy technique used. The primary endpoint was MVCA of TBNA versus TBFB. Secondary endpoints were complications categorized as bleeding, pneumothorax, and other.
Results:
Between August 2021 and April 2022, 15 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis. Six patients were included in cohort 1 and nine patients in cohort 2. A malignant diagnosis was confirmed in 11/15 (73.3%) cases, of which nine were primary lung malignancies. Overall, MVCA in samples obtained by TBFB was significantly larger than TBNA samples {TBFB-MVCA 9.80 mm2 [interquartile range (IQR), 2.70-10.39 mm2] vs. TBNA-MVCA 2.70 mm2 (IQR, 0.14-8.21 mm2), P=0.008}. Despite this difference, molecular testing was feasible in both TBNA and TBFB samples. No major complications were observed.
Conclusions:
Despite a significantly smaller MVCA provided by TBNA, samples were still considered feasible for NGS, indicating that TBNA represents an alternative method to obtain sufficient tumor tissue in peripheral nodules as part of the diagnosis of suspected lung cancer.
