Skip to main content
The Egyptian Journal of Bronchology
Download PDF

Comparative study between different methods of aliquots suction during bronchoalveolar lavage

Egyptian Journal of Bronchology volume 10, pages 85–92 (2016)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is a widely performed diagnostic and research procedure.

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to standardize the method of retrieving BAL in our institution through comparing three methods of BAL retrieval regarding efficacy and safety.

Methods

A total of 60 adult patients were randomly divided according to the method for retrieving BAL infusate into three groups, of 20 patients each. These are by using gentle hand suction into sterile syringe (Group I), using gentle syringe suction into a fluid trap (Group II), or using gentle suction by aspirator, collecting the lavage specimen into a collection trap (Group III).

Results

No statistical difference was noted between groups regarding age, sex, presenting symptoms, anesthesia, patient position, introduction site, postprocedural complications, and total cell count in the retrieved fluid. The volume of the recovered fluid using the method in group III was significantly higher than that of the method used in group II (P=0.001). Although the volume of the recovered fluid by the method in group III was apparently higher than that of the method in group I, and that for the method in group I was apparently higher than that in group II, both lacked significance (P=0.188 and 0.066, respectively).

Conclusion

All studied methods of retrieving BAL infusate are safe. Using an aspirator into a fluid trap is superior to using syringe suction into a fluid trap in retrieving more voluminous BAL infusate.

References

  1. Baughman RP. Technical aspects of bronchoalveolar lavage: recommendations for a standard procedure. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2007;28(5):475–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hunninghake GW, Gadek JE, Kawanami O, Ferrans VJ, Crystal RG. Inflammatory and immune processes in the human lung in health and disease: evaluation by bronchoalveolar lavage. Am J Pathol 1979;97 (1):149–206.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Andreasen CB. Bronchoalveolar lavage. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2003;33(1):69–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Technical recommendations and guidelines for bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). Report of the European Society of Pneumology Task Group. Eur Respir J 1989;2(6):561–585.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Reynolds HY. Use of bronchoalveolar lavage in humans - past necessity and future imperative. Lung 2000;178(5):271–293.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. [No authors listed]. Clinical guidelines and indications for bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL): report of the European Society of Pneumology Task Group on BAL. Eur Respir J 1990;3(8):937–976.

  7. Haslam PL, Baughman RP. Report of ERS Task Force: guidelines for measurement of acellular components and standardization of BAL. Eur Respir J 1999;14(2):245–248.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Costabel U. Recommendations for diagnostic bronchoalveolar lavage. German Society of Pneumology. Pneumologie 1993;47(11):607–619.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Strumpf IJ, Feld MK, Cornelius MJ, Keogh BA, Crystal RG. Safety of fiberoptic bronchoalveolar lavage in evaluation of interstitial lung disease. Chest 1981;80(3):268–271.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. [No authors listed]. Summary and recommendations of a workshop on the investigative use of fiberoptic bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage in asthmatics. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985;132(1):180–182.

  11. Van Gundy K, Boylen CT. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Indications, complications, contraindications. Postgrad Med 1988;83(1):289–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Collins AM, Rylance J, Wootton DG, Wright AD, Wright AKA, Fullerton DG et al. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) for research; obtaining adequate sample yield. J Vis Exp 2014;85:e4345.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rose AS, Knox KS. Bronchoalveolar lavage as a research tool. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2007;28(5):561–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Meyer KC, Raghu G, Baughman RP, Brown KK, Costabel U, du Bois RM et al. An official American Thoracic Society clinical practice guideline: the clinical utility of bronchoalveolar lavage cellular analysis in interstitial lung disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2012;185(9):1004–1014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cantrell ET, Warr GA, Busbee DL, Martin RR. Induction of aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase in human pulmonary alveolar macrophages by cigarette smoking. J Clin Invest 1973;52(8):1881–1884.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Goldstein RA, Rohatgi PK, Bergofsky EH, Block ER, Daniele RP, Dantzker DR et al. Clinical role of bronchoalveolar lavage in adults with pulmonary disease. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;142(2):481–486.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rosell A, Xaubet A, Agustí C, Castella J, Puzo C, Curull V, de Gracia J, RASTA study group. A new BAL fluid instillation and aspiration technique: a multicenter randomized study. Respir Med 2006;100(3):529–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. De Blasio F, Rotondetto S, Sarno M, Pezza A. Arterial oxygen desaturation as a consequence of different bronchoalveolar lavage techniques. J Bronchol 1995;2:107–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Meyer KC. Bronchoalveolar lavage as a diagnostic tool. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2007;28(5):546–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schildge J, Nagel C, Grun C. Bronchoalveolar lavage in interstitial lung diseases: does the recovery rate affect the results? Respiration 2007;74 (5):553–557.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Singletary ML, Phillippi-Falkenstein KM, Scanlon E, Bohm RP Jr, Veazey RS, Gill AF. Modification of a common BAL technique to enhance sample diagnostic value. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2008;47(5):47–51.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosas-Salazar C, Walczak SA, Winger DG, Kurland G, Spahr JE. Comparison of two aspiration techniques of bronchoalveolar lavage in children. Pediatr Pulmonol 2014;49(10):978–984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Woods KS, Defarges AM, Abrams-Ogg AC, Dobson H, Viel L, Brisson BA, Bienzle D. Comparison between manual aspiration via polyethylene tubing and aspiration via a suction pump with a suction trap connection for performing bronchoalveolar lavage in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 2013;74(4):523–529.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Woods KS, Defarges AM, Abrams-Ogg AC, Dobson H, Brisson BA, Viel L, Bienzle D. Comparison of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid obtained by manual aspiration with a handheld syringe with that obtained by automated suction pump aspiration from healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 2014;75(1):85–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Klech H, Hutter C. Side-effects and safety of BAL. Eur Respir J 1990;3 (8):939–940.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Chest Diseases, Alexandria Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria, 21613, Egypt

    Mohammad S. Soliman Atta, Ayman I. Baess PhD (MD) & Ebtesam H. Abomandour

  2. Departments of Clinical Pathology, Alexandria Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria, Egypt

    Reham F. Moftah

Authors
  1. Mohammad S. Soliman Atta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ayman I. Baess PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Reham F. Moftah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ebtesam H. Abomandour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ayman I. Baess PhD.

Additional information

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Atta, M.S.S., Baess, A.I., Moftah, R.F. et al. Comparative study between different methods of aliquots suction during bronchoalveolar lavage. Egypt J Bronchol 10, 85–92 (2016). https://doi.org/10.4103/1687-8426.184366

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1687-8426.184366

Keywords