title: Conventional Transbronchial Needle Aspiration Versus Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration, With or Without Rapid On-Site Evaluation, for the Diagnosis of Sarcoidosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) as a standalone modality is superior to conventional TBNA (c-TBNA) for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. However, the overall yield is not different if combined with endobronchial biopsy (EBB) and transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB). The utility of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) in a comparative evaluation of EBUS-TBNA versus c-TBNA for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis has not been previously evaluated.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eighty patients with suspected sarcoidosis were randomized 1:1:1:1 into 4 groups: c-TBNA without ROSE (TBNA-NR), c-TBNA with ROSE (TBNA-R), EBUS-TBNA without ROSE (EBUS-NR), and EBUS-TBNA with ROSE (EBUS-R). EBB and TBLB were performed in all patients. Primary objective was detection of granulomas for combined procedure. Secondary objectives were individual procedure yields, sedation dose, and procedure duration. Patients without a diagnosis following c-TBNA subsequently underwent EBUS-TBNA.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 74 patients were finally diagnosed with sarcoidosis. Overall, granuloma detection was not significantly different between the 4 groups (68% in TBNA-NR, 89% in TBNA-R, 84% in EBUS-NR, and 83% in EBUS-R groups, P=0.49). The yield of c-TBNA in the TBNA-NR group was lower compared with that in TBNA-R group and EBUS-TBNA in EBUS groups (32%, 72%, 68%, and 67% for TBNA-NR, TBNA-R, EBUS-NR, and EBUS-R groups, respectively, P=0.04). Additional 20% patients were diagnosed when EBUS-TBNA was performed following a nondiagnostic bronchoscopy procedure in the TBNA-NR group. Sedation requirement and procedure duration were significantly lower with c-TBNA as compared with EBUS-TBNA (P<0.001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  When performing TBNA in the setting of suspected sarcoidosis, we found c-TBNA with ROSE and EBUS-TBNA (with or without ROSE) to be superior to c-TBNA alone. Whether c-TBNA with ROSE is equivalent to EBUS-TBNA cannot be determined from our study due to small sample size/low power.
authors.affiliation: Departments of *Pulmonary Medicine and Sleep Disorders †Pathology ‡Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India.
authors.forename: Karan
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Madan
authors.forename: Ashesh
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Dhungana
authors.forename: Anant
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Mohan
authors.forename: Vijay
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Hadda
authors.forename: Deepali
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Jain
authors.forename: Sudheer
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Arava
authors.forename: Ravindra M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Pandey
authors.forename: Gopi C
authors.initials: GC
authors.lastname: Khilnani
authors.forename: Randeep
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Guleria
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D044963:Biopsy, Fine-Needle; D001999:Bronchoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D061765:Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D061705:Image-Guided Biopsy / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011446:Prospective Studies; D017565:Sarcoidosis, Pulmonary / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity