Date post: | 02-Apr-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jaheim-silcox |
View: | 221 times |
Download: | 3 times |
Tracheomalacia and Tracheobronchomalacia
Challenging the diagnostic gold standard and refining the definition
Melissa WeiMS4/MPH student
Diagnostic RadiologyJuly 2, 2009
Caveats:
• I am not a radiologist, and I do not regularly peruse radiology literature.
• I have taken a few epidemiology courses.
• As an epidemiologist in training, I enjoy counting, critiquing study methodology, and attempting at recommendations to hopefully advance research and ultimately patient care.
The focus of this presentation is on diagnosing and defining TBM:
• What are the diagnostic possibilities?• What are the advantages and limitations of
newer modalities (e.g. CT) over the gold standard, bronchoscopy, in diagnosing TBM?
• How well do these modalities correlate with bronchoscopy and with each other in diagnosing TBM?
• If the gold standard is replaced, how should the definition of TBM be revised so that it has a positive predictive value for symptomatic individuals and negative predictive value for healthy, asymptomatic individuals?
Presentation outlinePart I: BackgroundDefinition, Epidemiology, Classification, Pathophysiology, Clinical presentation
Part II: Diagnostic optionsHistorical perspective, bronchscopy as the current gold standard, CT, alternatives to CT, spirometry
Part III: Redefining TBMChallenges, suggestions
Part IV: Treatment (briefly)
Part I: What is Tracheomalacia?Malacia: softening of the tissuesTracheomalacia (TM): weakness of tracheal wall and/or
supporting tracheal cartilage, resulting in excessive expiratory collapse
Tracheobronchomalacia (TBM): mainstem bronchi also involved
Severity defined by extent of lumenal obstruction during expiration
– Mild: 50% lumen obstructed– Moderate: 75% lumen obstructed– Severe: posterior wall reaches anterior wall
Clinical significance: • Flaccidity of tracheal cartilage increases risk of airway
collapse especially with increased airflow demand
Lee 2009
Mild tracheomalacia45 year old asymptomatic man with normal pulmonary function
51% decreased cross-sectional area of tracheal lumen during expiration on axial dynamic CT
Normal oval-shaped tracheal lumen
Lee 2009
Severe tracheomalacia
Young child with compressed trachea from mediastinal vascular anomaly
Near collapse of tracheaMild tracheal compression from right-sided aortic arch (R)
EpidemiologyTBM in general adult population• Prevalence highest in men > 40 years (Jokinen 1977)
• Incidence increases with age (Jokinen 1977)
• 73% of TBM patients are between 50-80 years of age (Ikeda 1992)
TBM in symptomatic adults• 10-15% of patients referred to pulmonologist for
evaluation of chronic cough (Palombini 1999)
• 4.5% of 2150 patients who underwent bronchoscopy (Jokinen 1977)
– 1% with respiratory symptoms and bronchoscopy (Herzog 1958)
– 23% with history of chronic bronchitis and bronchoscopy (Jokinen 1976)
Classification Primary (congenital) TM <<
• Genetic eg polychondritis • Idiopathic “giant trachea” or
“Mounier-Kuhn” syndrome
Secondary (acquired) TM• Post-traumatic
• Intubation• Tracheostomy• External chest trauma• s/p lung transplantation
• Chronic inflammation/irritants• Emphysema• Chronic infection/bronchitis
• Chronic external compression of the trachea
• Tumors (benign or malignant)• Cysts• Abscesses• Aortic aneurysm• Vascular rings, undiagnosed in childhood
In kids, TM = #1 congenital tracheal anomaly; associated with transesophageal fistula
PathophysiologyNormal intrathoracic trachea
– Trachea dilates with inspiration, narrows with expiration– Reflects difference between intrthoracic and intraluminal pressures
Tracheomalacia = exaggerated physiologic process Accentuated changes in tracheal diameter
Intrathoracic problem (most common): excessive narrowing when Intrathoracic pressure > Intraluminal pressureEx) Forced expiration, Cough, Valsalva maneuver
Extrathoracic problem: negative intrapleural pressures transmitted to extrathoracic trachea due to pleural reflections upper airway collapses during inspiration
Atrophy of longitudinal elastic fibers of pars membranacea or impaired cartilage integrity airway soft, susceptible to collapse
Most common causes#1 Weakening of tracheal wall
– Intubation: recurrent, prolonged pressure necrosis, impaired blood flow, recurrent infections, mucosal inflammation
– High-dose steroids
#1 Inflammation/irritation of tracheal wall– Smoking– Recurrent infections: chronic bronchitis, pneumonia
3. Compression of trachea– Malignancy, abscess, cysts, goiter
4. Direct damage to tracheal wall– External trauma or surgery
5. Vascular malformations– Double aortic arch, R aortic arch with aberrant L subclavian a,
ligamentum arteriosum
1. Symptoms are nonspecific (Jokinen 1977, Carden 2005)
• Dyspnea (63-75%)• Chronic cough (50%)
- sputum production- “seal like” or barking cough
• Hemoptysis (33%)• Episodic choking; syncope with forced exhalation and cough
2. Concurrent respiratory disease common (Carden 2005)
• Chronic bronchitis• Emphysema• Bronchial cancer• Recurrent respiratory infection• Asthma
3. Pts may be Asymptomatic …… until stressed by infection (bronchitis, pneumonia)- Intubated patients: masked by PPV maintaining airway
Clinical presentation
4. Physical exam findings• Respiratory distress• Inspiratory wheezing• Stridor• Barking cough• Deep breathing, cough, and Valsalva manuever
elicit airway collapse
Clinical presentation
• Laryngomalacia• Subglottic stenosis• Vocal cord paralysis
TBM is commonly misdiagnosed as:• COPD • Asthma • Among 80 patients with suspected or diagnosed TBM, 40% had COPD and
24% had asthma (Loring 2007)
“Although TBM and COPD coexist, the implications of this coexistence are not fully understood.” -Kandaswamy 2009
Differential diagnosis
Imaging modalities• Plain radiographs – not diagnostic• Historical modalities• Flexible bronchoscopy – current gold standard• Standard spiral CT• Dynamic expiratory multi-detector CT (MDCT)• MRI• Virtual bronchoscopy
Pulmonary function tests• Research ongoing, not diagnostic
Part II: What are the diagnostic options?
Limited use of plain radiographs to diagnose TBM• TBM is a dynamic process accentuated by
forced expiration• Cannot visualize on anterioposterior or lateral
chest radiographs
Exception• TBM secondary to compression from other
structures (e.g. mediastinal goiter, tumor) may be visualized
Imaging: Plain radiographs
• Cinetracheograms to visualize tracheal flutter
• Fluroscopy to estimate tracheal diameter• Tracheograms and bronchograms
Replaced by bronchoscopy, which is more sensitive for diagnosing TBM
Historic modalities: We’ve come a long way
• Visualize dynamic tracheal or bronchial collapse• Trachea may also be widened• Flexible bronchoscope over rigid
- Patient can breathe spontaneously and perform additional maneuvers to elicit collapse of the airways
• Expiratory effort to achieve airway wall collapse through maneuvers (deep breathing, forced expiration, straining, coughing, others) has not been standardized
Bronchoscopy is the current gold standard for diagnosing TBM
Bronchoscopy
Carden 2005
• Invasive, requires general anesthesia (rigid bronchoscopy) or local anesthesia (flexible bronchoscopy), and more than half of patients sedated
• Contraindications: ongoing arrhythmias or refractory hypoxemia
• Complications: • 1.3% of 4,000 flexible bronchoscopies (Pue 1995)
• 25% of complications due to premedications or anesthetic drugs (Credle 1974)
• Bleeding, infection
However, bronchoscopy has limitations
• Noninvasive• Fast, entire central airway imaged in a few
seconds• High spatial resolution, great anatomic
coverage• Opportunity for multiplanar reformation and
2D, 3D reconstruction images• Can observe additional imaging features
characteristic of TBM
CT can also be used to diagnose TBM and has several advantages
over bronchoscopy
Carden 2005
2D CT reconstruction Inhalation Exhalation
Segmental tracheal collapse
An important advantage of CT over bronchoscopy:
Additional radiographic abnormalities can be identified to
characterize TBM.
A few observations include …
Dynamic expiratory CT64 year old man with chronic cough
“Frown sign” in 50% TBM patients
Trachea is collapsed with crescentaric, frown-like configuration of the airway lumen
Lee 2009
“Lunate configuration”
Lee 2009
Coronal diameter is widened compared with sagittal diameter
Dynamic expiratory CT 71 year old woman with dyspnea, chronic cough
Air trapping has also been observed in TBM patients
Gilkeson 2001
Focal collapse of proximal right upper lobe bronchus. Right upper lobe is hyperlucent, consistent with air-trapping
52 year old man with idiopathic TM and persistent cough after mainstem bronchi stent
What is the extent and distribution of air trapping in TBM?
First study to report air trapping in TBM:“Air trapping was observed with a higher frequency and greater severity in patients with TBM than in the control group.” -Zhang 2004
• Retrospective case-control study• 10 bronchospically diagnosed cases TBM (5 men,
5 women, aged 42-79 y, 1 asthma, 3 emphysema)• 10 controls (3 men, 7 women, aged 27-75 y, 5
asthma, 1 emphysema)
• Statistical analysis: Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon U testof the median group value for cases vs. controls
Cases: 10/10 air trappingmedian score 5 (range 2-12)
Controls: 6/10 air trapping, median score 2 (range 0-3)
“MEDIAN TOTAL air trapping score” was significantly higher in TBM group vs. control group (p<0.001)
Zhang 2004
Is air trapping specific to TBM cases?• There was also air trapping in the control group
(regardless of history of chronic airway disease), although less severe (median score 5 vs. 2)
Distribution:• Air-trapping in cases was mostly lobular (8/10) but
not always (2/10)• Lobular air trapping was also observed in 3/10
controlsLimitations of Zhang 2004: • Small sample size• Wilcoxon is a parametric test of the median
difference between the groups. It is highly influenced by outliers.
*
To check the appropriate use of the Wilcoxon test of the median difference between cases and controls:
After assessing for outliers (case scores 11 and 12), there was no change in the median score, although the mean decreased from 6 to 4.6. Thus, I agree with Zheng et al. that there is a statistically significant difference between the median air-trapping score in cases vs. controls after a sensitivity analysis for potential outliers.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Cases: median score 5, mean 6, range 2-12
Controls: median score 2, mean 1.6, range 0-3
* ** ** * * * *
****** ****
Air trapping score (Max 12)
Given the advantages of CT…
What is the quality of CT studies, and how well do CT findings
correlate with the gold standard, bronchoscopic diagnosis of TBM?
Single-detector spiral CT scan: compare cross-sectional area of the trachea during inspiratory and end-expiratory CT scan– Aquino (2001), case-control study
Multi-detector helical CT scan: captures continuous expiratory phase of respiration– Gilkeson (2001), case series
CT vs. bronchoscopy landmark studies
Aquino (2001), case-control study• N=12 bronchoscopically diagnosed cases acquired TM;
after excluding patients whose TM not seen on CT, N=10 (6 men, 4 women, aged 42-84 y), 23 healthy controls (15 men, 8 women, aged 27-57 y)
• Statistical analysis: t-test, receiver operator curve• Cross-sectional area between inspiratory and expiratory
CT more sensitive and specific than sagittal and coronal diameters for detecting TM
• >18% reduction in upper trachea and >28% reduction in midtrachea cross-sectional area had positive predictive value 89-100%, negative predictive value 95-100%
Suggests end-expiratory imaging may require lower threshold criterion than ≥ 50% narrowing especially if sagittal or coronal diameters used
Expiratory CT vs. bronchoscopy
Aquino 2001
Percent change in tracheal area not always >50% among Aquino study of bronchospically confirmed TBM cases
Aquino 2001
Percent change in upper and mid trachea cross-sectional area greater in cases than controls but not always > 50%
Coronal (Table 4) and saggital diameters (Table 3 not shown) lower than cross-sectional area (Table 2) and < 50%
Strengths:• Bronchospically confirmed TM cases• Automated measurement of tracheal lumen and
cross sectional area
Limitations:• Selection bias: Appropriate exclusion of 2
bronchospically confirmed TM cases (2/12)? Inclusion would decrease reported positive and negative predictive values
• Small sample size … but use of student’s t-test assumes normality
• Potential investigator bias: radiologists not blinded• Similarity between cases and (younger) controls?
Aquino strengths & limitations
Gilkeson (2001), case series• 13 patients with “suspected” TBM (7 men, 6 women,
aged 14-88 y, 3 asthma)• Multidetector inspiratory—dynamic expiratory CT and
spirometry performed on all patients• Fiberoptic bronchoscopy performed on 6/13 patients • Statistical analysis: Not provided!• Results: All patients had airway collapse on inspiratory
—dynamic expiratory CT that was highly correlated with degree of collapse on bronchoscopy
• Conclusion: supports more conservative diagnostic threshold of >50-70% narrowing on forced expiration to diagnose TBM
Dynamic MDCT vs. bronchoscopy
Gilkeson 2001
Note:
Bronchos-copy results for 6/13 patients
Exact value of collapse not given for CT and bronchos-copy, only ranges e.g. 50-75, 75-100
• Selection bias: “Our cohort was a highly selected patient population without healthy control subjects”
• Potential outcome misclassification for 7/13 patients without bronchoscopy: patients with “suspected TBM”
• Investigator bias: patient histories known, non-blinded • Small sample size: N=6 with both bronchoscopy & CT• Case series, no control group, cannot evaluate
statistical significance of results• Nebulous statistical methodology
– CT and bronchoscopy values given as 25 percentage point ranges (e.g. 50-75, 75-100), not exact values
– Correlation coefficients not provided
Questionable internal & external validity generalization
Limitations of Gilkeson’s dynamic MDCT vs. bronchoscopy case series study
To illustrate how selection bias could impact results in a case series study:
TBM Case Control
+ TBM
- TBM
Dynamic
MDCT
a b
c d
Increased patients in box “a” (patients with TBM on bronchoscopy and dynamic CT, most likely in this study) or fewer patients in box “c” would result in an increased odds that patients have TBM by bronchoscopy (outcome) given TBM by MDCT (exposure)
Bronchoscopy
Odds ratio, OR = a * d = a * d = OR b * c b * c
There are also different types of CT studies. How well do they correlate with
each other for diagnosing TBM?
Dynamic vs. end-expiratory CT:
–Baroni (2005)
–Ferretti (2008)
Baroni (2005), case series• N = 34 with CT diagnosis of TBM; after exclusions
N = 14 (11 men, 3 women, aged 19-79 years)• Airway collapse measured by multi-detector row CT
at end inspiration, dynamic expiration, and end expiration at aortic arch, carina, bronchus
• Statistical analysis: paired two-tailed t test • Dynamic expiratory CT elicited significantly greater
airway collapse than standard end-expiratory CT for all individuals at all three levels (all p < 0.005)– Biologically consistent with fact that dynamic
expiration produces higher level of intrathoracic-extratracheal pressure than end expiration
Dynamic CT vs. end-expiratory CT
Bronschospic results available for N =10
Baroni 2005
From bronchoscopy:• 7/14 with TBM• 3/14 without TBM• 4/14 data unavailable
Baroni 2005
TBM
TBMTBM
TBMNo TBM
No TBM
Bronch
>
TBM No TBM
Bronchoscopy 3 2
Dynamic Expiration 2 1
End Expiration 1 2
Baroni 2005
TBM
TBM
TBM
TBM
TBM
No TBM
No TBM
Bronch
>
TBM No TBM
Bronchoscopy 5 2
Dynamic Expiration 4 1
End Expiration 1 2
Baroni 2005
TBMTBMTBM
No TBM
No TBM
Bronch
>
TBM No TBM
Bronchoscopy 4 2
Dynamic Expiration 4 0
End Expiration 0 1
TBM
Baroni cont. Dynamic vs. end expiratory imaging:
• Airway collapse was consistently greater in dynamic expiration compared with end expiration – Dynamic: More often diagnosed TBM correctly
… but also over-diagnosed TBM in non-cases– End expiration: More likely to miss TBM
… but never diagnosed TBM in non-cases• When using the criteria of >50% reduced cross-
sectional area, there was disagreement in TBM diagnoses in 5/9 (56%) patients at the aortic arch, 6/10 (60%) patients at the carina, 6/7 (86%) patients at the bronchus intermedius
• Limitations: selection bias, small sample size with 20/34 excluded, non-blinded, lumens hand-traced
Ferretti (2008), prospective study• 70 patients with suspected TBM• Central airway collapse measured from the
percentage change in area and diameter between end inspiration, and two expiratory techniques at:– Trachea at three levels– Right and left main bronchi, sagittal diameter
• Airway collapse significantly greater with dynamic expiratory imaging than end-expiratory imaging: – Lower trachea (26% vs. 17%, p<0.009)– Right main bronchus (25% vs. 14%, p<0.01) – Left main bronchus (25% vs. 13%, p<0.01)
Dynamic expiratory consistently diagnoses more patients with TBM than end-expiratory imaging
Dynamic CT vs. end-expiratory CT
Limitation 1:• Healthy, asymptomatic individuals may demonstrate
expiratory collapse that exceeds the criterion for TBM
Recommendations• Use a more conservative threshold of 70% in
dynamic CT as indicative of TBM• Correlate MDCT results with respiratory symptoms
and functional impairment• Further research that stratifies by age, sex,
race/ethnicity, coexistent pulmonary disease, and other risk factors for TBM
What are the limitations in using CT imaging to diagnose TBM?
Lee 2009
Limitation 2:• Potential “double dose” radiation exposure in paired
inspiratory-expiratory CT
Recommendations• Low-dose technique possible without compromising
image quality – High contrast between air-filled trachea and soft
tissue structures already present– No difference observed between standard (240-
260 mA) and low-dose (40-80mA) radiation for assessing tracheal lumen during dynamic expiration (Zhang 2003)
CT limitations
Lee 2009
1. Improved ability to diagnose TBM with CT? Sparse studies afflicted by selection bias and investigator bias report correlation between CT and bronchosocpy, but more data warranted
2. Should MDCT be the new gold standard? Consider both strengths and limitations of CT
3. How/When is there consensus to replace the gold standard? Historically not always data-driven, may be influenced by subspecialty groups
4. If CT replaces bronchoscopy, how should the definition and diagnostic criteria of TBM be revised?
Should MDCT replace bronchoscopy?
Beyond CT, what alternative diagnostic imaging modalities
have been studied?
• Dynamic MRI during forced expiration and cough• Preferred method for evaluating extrinsic airway
abnormalities (e.g. vascular compression syndromes) in children (Faust 2002)
• Advantages: Repeated assessment during multiple respiratory maneuvers without ionizing radiation exposure
• Disadvantages: COST!!
Sensitivity and specificity compared with bronchoscopy and CT? To be demonstrated in case-control studies
Imaging: MRI
Carden 2005
MRI child with vascular compression syndrome
Narrowed trachea secondary to vascular entrapment
Suto1998
Among adults, MRI during coughing showed significantly greater collapsibility in bronchospically confirmed TBM cases (N=6) compared with healthy controls (N=13) (p<0.05)
Axial MRI during coughing also resulted in significantly greater collapsibility than forced expiration and inspiration for both cases and controls (p<0.01)
44 year old man with bronchospically confirmed TM
Suto1998
forced inspiration forced expiration coughing
Virtual bronchoscopy57 year old woman with suspected congenital lobar emphysema of right lung
Gilkeson 2001
Mild narrowing but patent right middle (M) and lower (L) lobe bronchi
Complete collapse of lower lobe orifice (authors state this was not appreciated on axial CT imaging)
• CXR - assess baseline chronic disease or new infection• However, cannot diagnose TBM
• Bronchoscopy, flexible - historical gold standard• Dynamic CT - new standard???
• Diagnositic threshold should be higher in dynamic CT but lower for end-expiratory CT
• MRI• Multiple maneuvers and assessments possible without
radiation exposure• Significantly greater cost
• Virtual bronchoscopy – more studies warranted
Imaging summary
• Yes, but many findings are non-specific to TBM- Decreased FEV1
also seen in obstruction- Low peak flow rate with a rapid decrease in flow
also seen in obstruction- Flow oscillations
also seen in obstructive sleep apnea, structural or functional larynx abnormalities, neuromuscular disease
- Elevated airway resistance- Inspiratory limb shape preserved
Do TBM patients exhibit abnormalities in pulmonary function tests?
Unique “notch” in forced expiratory spirograms in TBM• “Break” or “notch” in expiratory phase of flow-volume
curve thought to represent the point of major airway collapse after dead space air volume is emptied
• First described by Koblet and Wyss (1955) and observed in 3 subsequent studies
• Limitation: Moderate to severe emphysema patients display similar notch, regardless of concurrent TBM
Unreliable for diagnosing TBM
Are there TBM-specific findings in pulmonary function tests?
Carden 2005
Flow-volume loops in TBMThere is a rapid decline in maximal expiratory flow following a sharp peak associated with collapsed central airways from negative transmural pressure.
Normal inspiratory profile from dilation of central airways during treatment with positive transmural pressure.
Most recent studies report NO association• Obstruction from spirometry is proportional to severity
of TBM (Nuutinen 1977)• No correlation between obstruction and TBM severity
(Gilkeson 2001)• No correlation between central airway collapse (80 suspected
and confirmed TBM cases) and degree of obstruction via FEV1. Central airway collapse was observed regardless of expiratory flow limitation during quiet breathing. One cannot assume central airway narrowing (especially during quiet exhalation) in patients with obstructive airway disease. Likewise, symptomatic central airway narrowing may exist in patients without significant airflow obstruction (Loring 2007)
Is there an association between obstruction findings in spirometry and
severity of TBM?
Part III:How should the definition and diagnostic
criteria for TBM be revised to improve sensitivity and specificity
of symptomatic patients who may benefit from treatment?
• Lack of clarity in definitions, measurement criteria and terminology
• Need to establish normal vs. abnormal narrowing of central airways
• TBM is a spectrum• Patients with TBM present with a range of symptoms• Coexistence of asthma, COPD among TBM patients• Currently no universally agreed upon classification system
Proposed system by Murgu 2007 ….
Challenges in diagnosing TBM
FEMOS classification
• Functional status
• Extent of abnormality
• Morphology
• Origin
• Severity of airway disease
Murgu 2007
FEMOS classification system
Functional status – modified World Health Organization functional classification
• Class I (F1) – no limitation
• Class II (F2) – mild limitation of physical activity
• Class III (F3) – marked limitation of physical activity
• Class IV (F4) – unable to perform any physical activity at rest
Murgu 2007
FEMOS classification system
Extent of abnormality based on location and distribution of the abnormal airway segment viewed on bronchoscopy
• Normal (E1) – no airway abnormality• Focal (E2) – abnormality present in one main or
lobar bronchus or one tracheal region (upper, mid or lower)
• Multifocal (E3) – abnormality present in two contiguous or at least two non-contiguous regions
• Diffuse (E4) – abnormality present in more than two contiguous regions
Murgu 2007
FEMOS classification system
Extent of abnormality based on location and distribution of the abnormal airway segment viewed on bronchoscopy
• Normal (E1) – no airway abnormality• Focal (E2) – abnormality present in one main or
lobar bronchus or one tracheal region (upper, mid or lower)
• Multifocal (E3) – abnormality present in two contiguous or at least two non-contiguous regions
• Diffuse (E4) – abnormality present in more than two contiguous regions
Murgu 2007
FEMOS classification system
Origin is the etiology of the airway abnormality
• Idiopathic – no underlying etiology identified
• Secondary – result of an illness or other pathological process
Murgu 2007
FEMOS classification system
Severity of airway collapse based on the degree of airway lumen reduction during expiration as observed in bronchoscopy
• Normal (S1) – no abnormal airway collapse
• Mild (S2) – 50-75% expiratory airway collapse
• Moderate (S3) – 75-100% expiratory airway collapse
• Severe (S4) – 100% expiratory airway collapse and airway walls make contact
Murgu 2007
Suggestions for future TBM studies
• Prospective cohort studies ideal to decrease selection bias, but challenging to conduct
• To decrease bias in case control studies: – Careful selection of control group (ideally identical
to cases by all characteristics except TBM)– Large sample size, test normality assumption– To reduce investigator bias, blinding to subjects’
case status and history– Automated measurement of tracheal lumen and
cross-sectional area with exact values provided– Review by at least two radiologists and report
kappa statistic of inter-observer agreement
Part IV: Treatment (Briefly)Asymptomatic No treatmentSymptomatic:
– Supportive care – Control bronchospasm– Treat primary problem eg obstructive disease
Critical condition:– Positive-pressure ventilation– CPAP increases FVC and reduces airway collapse (Ferguson 1993)– Facilitate mobilization of secretions
Severe cases may benefit from surgery:– Tracheostomy: bypass malacic segment or tube. May be complicated by
recurrent tracheobronchitis, stenosis at stoma site – Ceramic rings: Longest successful follow-up in 16/16 patients after 6.4
years (Amedee 1992)– Stents (silicone > metal): patients reported immediate improvement in
symptoms but PFTs declined at mean 15 months follow-up after stenting (Gotway 2002). Center and operator dependent. High complications. More research needed.
After tracheoplasty
Carden 2005
Lessons from Dr. Gosselin
Resist algorithms
&binary thinking
People are like
snowflakes
Carden 2005
References1. Amedee RG, Mann WJ, Lyons GD. Tracheomalacia repair using ceramic rings. Otolarngol Head
Neck Surg 1992;106:270-4.2. Aquino SL, Shepard JO, Ginns LC, et al. Acquired tracheomalacia: detection by expiratory CT scan.
J Comput Assist Tomography 2001;25:394-9.3. Baroni RH, Feller-Kopamn D, Nishino M, et al. Tracheobronchomalacia: comparison between end-
expiratory and dynamic expiratory CT for evaluation of central airway collapse. Radiology 2005;235:635-41.
4. Carden KA. Tracheomalacia and tracheobronchomalacia in children and adults: an in-depth review. Chest 2005;127:984-1005.
5. Credle WF Jr, Smiddy JF, Elliott RC. Complications of fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Am Rev Respir Dis 1974;109:67-72.
6. Ferguson GT, Benoist J. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure in the treatment of tracheobronchomalacia. Am Rev Respir Dis 1993;147:457-61.
7. Ferretti GR, Jankowski A, Perrin MA, et al. Multi-detector CT evaluation in patients suspected of tracheobronchomalacia: comparison of end-expiratory with dynamci expiratory volumetric acquisitions. Eur J Radiol 2008;68:340-6.
8. Gilkeson RC, Ciancibello LM, Hejal RB, et al. Tracheobronchomalacia: dynamic airway evaluation with multidetector CT. AJR 2001;176:205-10.
9. Gotway MB, Golden JA, JaBerge JM, et al. Benign tracheobronchial stenoses: changes in short-term and long-term pulmonary function testing after expandable metallic stent placement. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002;26:564-72.
10. Herzog H. Expiratory stenosis of the trachea and great bronchi by loosening of the membranous portion; plastic chip repair. Thoraxchirurgie 1958;5:281-319.
11. Ikeda S, Hanawa T, Konishi T, et al. Diagnosis, incidence, clinicopathology and surgical treatment of acquired tracheobronchomalacia. Nihon Kyobu Shikkan Gakkai Zasshi 1992;30:1028-35.
References12. Jokinen K, Palva T, Nuutinen J. Chronic bronchitis: a bronchologic evaluation. ORL J
Otorhinolarygngol Relat Spec 1976;38:178-86.13. Jokinen K, Palva T, Sutinen S, Nuutinen. Acquired tracheobronchomalacia. Annals of
Clinical Research 1977;9:52-7.14. Kandasway C, Balasubramanian V. Review of adult tracheomalacia and its relationship
with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2009;15:113-9.15. Lee EY, Litmanovich D, Boiselle PM. Multidetector CT evaluation of
tracheobronchomalacia. Radiol Clin N Am 2009;47:261-9.16. Loring SH, O’Donnell CR, Feller-Kopman DJ, Ernst A. Central airway mechanics and flow
limitation in acquired tracheobronchomalacia. Chest 2007;131:1118-24.17. Murgu SD, Cold HG. Description of a multidimensional classification system for patients
with expiratory central airway collapse. Respirology 2007;12:543-50. 18. Palombini BC, Villanova CA, Araujo E, et al. A pathologenic triad in chronic cough:
asthma, post nasal drip, and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Chest 1999;116:279-84.19. Pue CA, Pacht ER. Complications of fiberoptic bronchoscopy at a university hospital.
Chest 1995;107:430-2.20. Suto Y, Tanabe Y. Evaluation of tracheal collapsibility in patients with tracheomalacia
during dynamic MR imaging during coughing. AJR 1998;171:393-4.21. Zhang J, Hasegawa I, Feller-Kopamn D, et al. Dynamic expiratory volumetric CT imaging
of the central airways: comparison of standard-dose and low-dose techniques. Acad Radiol 2003;10:719-24.
22. Zhang J, Hasegawa I, Hatabu H, et al. Frequency and severity of air trapping at dynamic expiratory CT in patients with tracheobronchomalacia. AJR 2004;182:81-5.