Efficacy of surveillance bronchoscopy versus clinically indicated bronchoscopy for detection of acute lung transplant rejection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background Acute allograft rejection after lung transplantation significantly increases the risk of developing bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, a form of chronic lung allograft dysfunction and the leading cause of mortality beyond the initial post-transplantation year. There are two diagnostic approaches available for monitoring lung transplant recipients: clinically indicated bronchoscopy (CIB) and surveillance bronchoscopy (SB). The efficacy of both methods and their relative superiority in detecting acute rejection have not been conclusively determined. Methods We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases from inception until 10 October 2023 for prospective studies comparing the efficacy of SB and CIB. Meta-analysis using a random effects model was performed for three observational cohort studies, totalling 122 patients with 527 bronchoscopies. Results Overall, neither SB nor CIB had a higher likelihood of detecting acute lung transplant rejection of any grade. Subsequent subgroup analyses showed no advantage for SB in detecting minimal rejection (grade A1), but an inverse association was observed for higher-grade rejection. Conclusion In conclusion, our study found no significant difference in detecting acute lung transplant rejection between SB and CIB. However, due to the limited number of studies and small sample sizes, larger prospective studies are urgently needed to definitely determine whether there truly exists no difference between SB and CIB in detecting acute rejection, particularly A1 minimal rejection.