Trial reportBMC pulmonary medicine2017
Single use and conventional bronchoscopes for Broncho alveolar lavage (BAL) in research: a comparative study (NCT 02515591).
Trial report in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy with single use bronchoscopes versus reusable bronchoscopes - a prospective randomized trial (TraSUB).BMC anesthesiology · 2022Trial
- Single-use vs. reusable flexible bronchoscopes for airway management and in critical care: a narrative review.Anaesthesia · 2025Review
- Deficiency and dysfunctional roles of natural killer T cells in patients with ARDS.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Respiratory mucosal immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 after infection and vaccination.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Single-use flexible bronchoscopes vs traditional reusable flexible bronchoscopes: a prospective controlled study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Article
- Performance of a new single-use bronchoscope versus a marketed single-use comparator: a bench study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2022Article
- Thirteen-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine-Induced Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Responses in Serum Associated With Serotype-Specific IgG in the Lung.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Repair costs of reusable bronchoscopes in the intensive care unit.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Single-Use and Reusable Flexible Bronchoscopes in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Development of endotracheal intubation devices for patients with tumors.American journal of cancer research · 2022Review
- Optical Devices in Tracheal Intubation-State of the Art in 2020.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Bronchoscopy precautions and recommendations in the COVID-19 pandemic.Paediatric respiratory reviews · 2021Review
- Single-Use (Disposable) Flexible Bronchoscopes: The Future of Bronchoscopy?Advances in therapy · 2020Review
- With the current COVID pandemic: should we use single-use flexible bronchoscopes instead of conventional bronchoscopes?Critical care (London, England) · 2020Article
- Nasal Pneumococcal Density Is Associated with Microaspiration and Heightened Human Alveolar Macrophage Responsiveness to Bacterial Pathogens.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020Article
- Human alveolar macrophages predominately express combined classical M1 and M2 surface markers in steady state.Respiratory research · 2018Article
- Expert panel consensus statement on the applications and precaution strategies of bronchoscopy in patients with COVID-19.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBroncho alveolar lavage (BAL) is widely used for investigative research to study innate, cellular and humoral immune responses, and in early phase drug trials. Conventional (multiple use) flexible bronchoscopes have time and monetary costs associated with cleaning, and carries a small risk of cross infection. Single use bronchoscopes may provide an alternative, but have not been evaluated in this context.
methodsHealthy volunteers underwent bronchoscopy at a day-case clinical research unit using the Ambu® aScope
resultsTen volunteers, (mean age 23 years, six male) participated. Bronchoscopies were carried out by one of two senior bronchoscopists, experienced in the technique of obtaining BAL for research purposes. The results were compared to 50 (mean age 23, 14 male) procedures performed using the conventional scope by the same two bronchoscopists. The total volume yield was significantly higher in the disposable group median 152 ml (IQR 141-166 ml) as compared to conventional 124 ml (110-135 ml), p = <0.01. The total cell yield and viability were similar in both groups, with no significant differences.
conclusionsWith single use bronchoscopes, we achieved a larger BAL volume yield than conventional bronchoscopes, with comparable cell yield and viability. Better volume yields can potentially reduce post procedure side effects such as pleuritic chest pain and cough. The risk of cross infection can be eliminated, providing reassurance to researchers and participants. Reduced maintenance requirements can be cost effective. These could potentially be used for early phase drug development studies.
trial registrationThis trial was registered prospectively in July 2015 with the National Clinical Trials register, with the following registration number assigned: NCT 02515591 .
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.