ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2023
Diagnostic outcomes of robotic-assisted bronchoscopy for pulmonary lesions in a real-world multicenter community setting.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic performance and safety for robotic-assisted bronchoscopy in pulmonary nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic yield and safety of diagnostic techniques for pulmonary lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- Tool-in-lesion confirmation and diagnostic yield of digital tomosynthesis-integrated robotic bronchoscopic biopsy of lung nodules.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Clinical and operational impact of single anesthesia events in the surgical management of early-stage lung cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Outcomes of Robotic Bronchoscopy in a Multidisciplinary, Multi-hospital Lung Nodule Program.The Journal of surgical research · 2026Observational
- Predictors of Diagnostic Yield in Shape-Sensing Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy (ssRAB): A Retrospective Single-Center Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cost of lung cancer diagnosis: cost differences between national health system and private sector.Lung cancer management · 2025Review
- Robotic-assisted and electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy for multi-focal lung cancers: a narrative review.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
- Single-Anesthesia Event for Lung Nodule Marking and Minimally Invasive Sublobar Resection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnostic utility of bronchoscopy for newly emerging peripheral pulmonary lesions after pulmonary resection.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
- Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Transbronchial Biopsies of Pulmonary Nodules: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Robotic-assisted bronchoscopic localization for small pulmonary nodules: a novel approach to minimally invasive surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Ultrathin Bronchoscopy Without Virtual Navigation for Diagnosis of Peripheral Lung Lesions.Lung · 2024Article
- Cone-beam computed tomography-guided shape-sensing robotic bronchoscopyJournal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Robotic-assisted bronchoscopy: a narrative review of systems.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- [Clinical Application of Robotic Assisted Bronchoscopy in Peripheral Pulmonary Nodule Biopsy].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2024Review
- Robotic Bronchoscopy in Lung Cancer Diagnosis.Cancers · 2024Review
- Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy: A Comprehensive Review of System Functions and Analysis of Outcome Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Ablation for Single Pulmonary Nodules, Primary or Metastatic. Εndobronchial Ablation Systems or Percutaneous.Journal of Cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted bronchoscopy (RAB) is among the newest bronchoscopic technologies, allowing improved visualization and access for small and hard-to-reach nodules. RAB studies have primarily been conducted at academic centers, limiting the generalizability of results to the broader real-world setting, while variability in diagnostic yield definitions has impaired the validity of cross-study comparisons. The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic yield and sensitivity for malignancy of RAB in patients with pulmonary lesions in a community setting and explore the impact of different definitions on diagnostic yield estimates.
methodsData were collected retrospectively from medical records of patients ≥ 21 years who underwent bronchoscopy with the Monarch® Platform (Auris Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA) for biopsy of pulmonary lesions at three US community hospitals between January 2019 and March 2020. Diagnostic yield was calculated at the index RAB and using 12-month follow-up data. At index, all malignant and benign (specific and non-specific) diagnoses were considered diagnostic. After 12 months, benign non-specific cases were considered diagnostic only when follow-up data corroborated the benign result. An alternative definition at index classified benign non-specific results as non-diagnostic, while an alternative 12-month definition categorized index non-diagnostic cases as diagnostic if no malignancy was diagnosed during follow-up.
resultsThe study included 264 patients. Median lesion size was 19.3 mm, 58.9% were peripherally located, and 30.1% had a bronchus sign. Samples were obtained via Monarch in 99.6% of patients. Pathology led to a malignant diagnosis in 115 patients (43.6%), a benign diagnosis in 110 (41.7%), and 39 (14.8%) non-diagnostic cases. Index diagnostic yield was 85.2% (95% CI: [80.9%, 89.5%]) and the 12-month diagnostic yield was 79.4% (95% CI: [74.4%, 84.3%]). Alternative definitions resulted in diagnostic yield estimates of 58.7% (95% CI: [52.8%, 64.7%]) at index and 89.0% (95% CI: [85.1%, 92.8%]) at 12 months. Sensitivity for malignancy was 79.3% (95% CI: [72.7%, 85.9%]) and cancer prevalence was 58.0% after 12 months.
conclusionsRAB demonstrated a high diagnostic yield in the largest study to date, despite representing a real-world community population with a relatively low prevalence of cancer. Alternative definitions had a considerable impact on diagnostic yield estimates.
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.