SynthesisPharmacoEconomics - open2022
The Cost of Flexible Bronchoscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Remimazolam compared with propofol, dexmedetomidine, and midazolam for adult sedation in flexible bronchoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Pooled it
- Flexible Bronchoscopy in the Intensive Care Unit: Controversies, Clinical Applications, and the Expanding Role of Intensivists.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Single-Use Flexible Bronchoscopy: Advances in Technology and Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cost analysis of single-use versus reusable bronchoscopes in German intensive care units.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2026Article
- Single-use flexible bronchoscopy with the Boston ScientificJournal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Comparison of diagnostic yield and complication of medical thoracoscopy using Flexible Bronchoscope versus Semi-Rigid Pleuroscope among Hospitalized Patients with Pleural Effusion (FLEXPLEUR): a retrospective observational study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Single-use vs. reusable flexible bronchoscopes for airway management and in critical care: a narrative review.Anaesthesia · 2025Review
- Technological advances in single-use or disposable bronchoscopy: an evaluation of the Innovative AmbuJournal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Costs involved in compliance with new endoscope reprocessing guidelines.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Systematic Review and Cost-Consequence Analysis of Ambu aScope 5 Broncho Compared with Reusable Flexible Bronchoscopes: Insights from Two US University Hospitals and an Academic Institution.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
- Single-use flexible bronchoscopes vs traditional reusable flexible bronchoscopes: a prospective controlled study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Article
- Management and outcome of obstructive airway complications after lung transplantation - a 12-year retrospective cohort study.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveUntil 2009, only reusable bronchoscopes were marketed, but the introduction and widespread adoption of single-use flexible bronchoscopes (SFBs) as an emerging technology has since accelerated. Several studies have described the costs of reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFBs) and SFBs. This meta-analysis aimed to compile the current published evidence to analyse the cost of different scenarios using RFBs and SFBs.
methodsAll published literature describing the cost of RFBs or SFBs was identified by searching PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar, limited to those between 1 January, 2009 and 6 November, 2020. Included studies should report the total cost of RFBs. Continuous data were extracted for relevant outcomes and analysed using RStudio
resultsIn the systematic literature review, 342 studies were initially identified, and 11 were included in the final analysis. The mean RFB procedure cost was $266 (standard error of the mean: 34), including capital investments, repairs and reprocessing costs of $91, $92 and $83, respectively. The mean SFB procedure cost was $289 (standard error of the mean: 10). The incremental cost was $23 (standard error of the mean: 33) and was not significant (p = 0.46). Because of the economy of scale, RFB is more likely to be cost minimising compared with SFB when performing 306 or 39 procedures per site or RFB, respectively.
conclusionsIn this study, we found no significant difference in the cost of use between RFBs and SFBs and a high risk of bias.
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.