Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27076949›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2016

The optimal sequence for bronchial brushing and forceps biopsy in lung cancer diagnosis: a random control study.

Gang Hou, Yuan Miao, Xue-Jun Hu, Wei Wang, Qiu-Yue Wang, Guang-Ping Wu, En-Hua Wang, Jian Kang

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05992740 (The Optimal Sequence of Bronchial Brushing, Forceps Biopsy and Washing for Diagnosis of Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05992740 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

The Optimal Sequence of Bronchial Brushing, Forceps Biopsy and Washing for Diagnosis of Lung Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2023 to 2025Enrolled65ConditionsLung CancerArmsbronchoscope
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gang Hou1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Yuan Miao1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Xue-Jun Hu1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Wei Wang1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Qiu-Yue Wang1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Guang-Ping Wu1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
En-Hua Wang1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
Jian Kang1 Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China ; 2 Department of Pathology, The First Hospital and College of Basic Medical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China.
China Medical University · CNFirst Hospital of China Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptimizing basic techniques in diagnostic bronchoscopy is important for improving medical services in developing countries. In this study, the optimal sequence of bronchial brushing relative to bronchial biopsy for lung cancer diagnosis was evaluated.

methodsA total of 420 patients with visible endobronchial tumors were prospectively and randomly enrolled in two groups: a pre-biopsy brushing group, receiving two brushings before biopsy; two brushings which performed afterwards; were set as self-control and compared with the pre-biopsy brushings as the intra-group comparison; and a post-biopsy brushing group, only receiving two brushings after biopsy, which were compared with the pre-biopsy brushings as the inter-group comparison. Diagnostic yield of brushing was compared before and after biopsy, and as well as for different tumor pathologies and bronchoscopic morphologies. The occurrence of treated bleeding which defined as bleeding needed further intervention with argon plasma coagulation and/or anti-coagulation drugs in two groups was also compared.

resultsOnly patients with a definitive cytological or histological diagnosis of lung cancer based on bronchoscopy or other confirmatory techniques were included. Patients were excluded if they had submucosal lesions, extrinsic compressions, pulmonary metastasis of extrapulmonary malignancies or uncommon non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). A total of 362 patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Diagnostic yield for pre-biopsy brushing (49.2%, 88/179) was significantly higher than for post-biopsy brushing within the same pre-biopsy brushing group (31.8%, 57/179) (P=0.007) as the intra-group comparison, and significantly higher than for post-biopsy brushing in the post group (30.6%, 56/183) (P<0.001) as the inter-group comparison. No difference in occurrence of treated bleeding for pre- vs. post-biopsy bronchial brushing was found.

conclusionsSupplementing bronchoscopic forceps biopsy with brushing improves diagnostic yield in lung cancer. In cases of endobronchial exophytic tumors, pre-biopsy brushing appears to be superior to post-biopsy brushing.

Indexed as

bronchoscopybrushingForceps biopsylung cancer

Identifiers

PMID27076949
PMCPMC4805806
OpenAlexW2288575141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.