ArticleSurgical endoscopy2012
Thoracoscopic coaxial cutting needle biopsy for clinically suspected lung cancer: technical details, diagnostic accuracy, and probable complications.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle has been described regarding the technical details, diagnostic accuracy, and probable complications of thoracoscopic cutting needle biopsy, which seems to be preferable to transthoracic needle biopsy for patients scheduled to undergo surgery for suspected lung cancer.
methodsThis study was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database of patients who underwent surgical biopsy for suspected lung cancer (n = 176). Sixty-two patients underwent thoracoscopic cutting needle biopsy, which was performed via thoracoport using a 16 gauge coaxial cutting needle; the remaining 114 patients underwent excisional biopsy, followed by curative intent surgery.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity of diagnosing lung cancer by thoracoscopic needle biopsy were 57/59 (96.6%) and 1/3 (33.3%), respectively. One false-negative result and one undiagnostic result occurred, but both lesions were correctly re-diagnosed by backup excisional biopsy during the same operation. When analysis was restricted to patients with lung lesions predominantly presenting with ground glass opacity, the sensitivity and specificity were 13/14 (92.9%) and 1/1 (100%), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of diagnosing lung cancer by surgical biopsy in all patients were 164/165 (99.4%), 9/11 (81.8%), and 173/176 (98.3%), respectively. Pleural recurrence was identified in one patient after thoracoscopic needle biopsy whose pleural lavage cytology, performed before biopsy, was negative.
conclusionsThoracoscopic cutting needle biopsy can be effectively applied to patients with an indeterminate lung tumor, especially those patients with lesions possessing ground glass opacity. However, further evaluation is necessary to confirm the risk of pleural dissemination induced by this procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.