ArticleKorean journal of radiology2019
Learning Curve of C-Arm Cone-beam Computed Tomography Virtual Navigation-Guided Percutaneous Transthoracic Needle Biopsy.
Article in Korean journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cone beam computed tomography for navigational bronchoscopy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Review
- Learning Curve of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Needle Biopsy for Pleural Lesions: A Retrospective Study at Two Tertiary Referral Hospitals.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effect of smoking on the diagnostic results and complication rates of percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy.European radiology · 2024Article
- Robotic-assisted CT-guided percutaneous pulmonary nodules localization by hook-wire needles: a retrospective observational study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy and Complication of Computed Tomography (CT)-Guided Percutaneous Transthoracic Lung Biopsy in Patients 80 Years and Older.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Application of cumulative summation (CUSUM) method and mathematical model to evaluate the learning effect in central venous catheter port implantation.Japanese journal of radiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the learning curve for C-arm cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) virtual navigation-guided percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy (PTNB) and to determine the amount of experience needed to develop appropriate skills for this procedure using cumulative summation (CUSUM). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 2042 CBCT virtual navigation-guided PTNBs performed by 7 novice operators between March 2011 and December 2014. Learning curves for CBCT virtual navigation-guided PTNB with respect to its diagnostic performance and the occurrence of biopsy-related pneumothorax were analyzed using standard and risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM). Acceptable failure rates were determined as 0.06 for diagnostic failure and 0.25 for PTNB-related pneumothorax.
resultsStandard CUSUM indicated that 6 of the 7 operators achieved an acceptable diagnostic failure rate after a median of 105 PTNB procedures (95% confidence interval [CI], 14-240), and 6 of the operators achieved acceptable pneumothorax occurrence rate after a median of 79 PTNB procedures (95% CI, 27-155). RA-CUSUM showed that 93 (95% CI, 39-142) and 80 (95% CI, 38-127) PTNB procedures were required to achieve acceptable diagnostic performance and pneumothorax occurrence, respectively.
conclusionThe novice operators' skills in performing CBCT virtual navigation-guided PTNBs improved with increasing experience over a wide range of learning periods.
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.