ArticleAnnals of thoracic medicine
Can positron emission tomography/computed tomography be predictive of diagnostic success in endobronchial biopsies performed through a fiber-optic bronchoscopy in lung cancer?
Article in Annals of thoracic medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thoracic ultrasonography-guided biopsy: Radiological and radiometabolic factors affecting diagnostic success.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2026Article
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
purposeThe purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of homogeneous/heterogeneous (necrotic) involvement and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) value of the lesion on positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) of patients who underwent fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) for prediagnosis of lung cancer and biopsy for endobronchial lesion on the diagnostic success of biopsy procedure.
methodsBetween January 2014 and December 2016, patients with final diagnosis of pulmonary malignancy as determined by FOB biopsy and patients who failed to be diagnosed by FOB biopsy and diagnosed with pulmonary malignancy by a different diagnostic method were examined. These patients were divided into two groups as those with diagnosis by FOB biopsy (Group 1) and those who failed to be diagnosed by this method and diagnosed with pulmonary malignancy by a different diagnostic method (Group 2). The SUVmax values of the two groups were compared with lesion characteristics of homogeneous, heterogeneous involvement/presence of necrotic component as shown by PET-CT. Group data were assessed by Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U-test. In all tests,
findingsA total of 193 participants with a mean age of 61 ± 9.4 were included in the study. There were 128 (66.3%) cases in Group 1 and 65 (33.7%) cases in Group 2. The mean SUVmax value was 16.4 in Group 1 and 15.1 in Group 2. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (
conclusionWe concluded that the high SUVmax value of the mass lesion on PET-CT did not increase the diagnostic value of the biopsy procedure in patients prediagnosed with lung cancer and that the diagnostic success of FOB biopsy was poor in cases where PET-CT showed heterogeneous involvement of the mass lesion.
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.