ArticleJournal of cytology
Bronchoalveolar Lavage in Diagnostic Evaluation of Pulmonary Diseases- An Institutional Experience.
Article in Journal of cytology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Linking Gastroesophageal Reflux Characteristics to Airway Inflammation: Insights from Bronchoalveolar Lavage Cytology in Severe Preschool Wheeze.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Diagnostic value of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid metagenomic next-generation sequencing for pulmonary infections in patients with connective tissue disease: A retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Utility of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Flow Cytometric Leukocyte Profiling in Interstitial Lung Disease and Infection.Biomolecules · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Diagnostic Efficacy of Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing on Nasopharyngeal Swabs in Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Application of Innovative 3D Pathological Tactic for Diagnosis of Organizing Pneumonia.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is a widely accepted investigative tool for the diagnosis of pulmonary lesions. This study was done to find out the usefulness of BAL in diagnosis of pulmonary lesions from central Indian patient population. Methods: A cross-sectional prospective study was performed over a period of three years. All the BAL specimens of patients presenting to Department of Pulmonary Medicine and Tuberculosis during a period of January 2017 to December 2019 were included in the study. Cyto-histopathologic correlation was done, wherever available. Results: Of total 277 cases, there were 178 (64.5%) males and 99 (35.5%) females. The age of patients ranged from 4 years to 82 years. In 92 (33%) cases, specific infective etiology could be identified on BAL cytology, the most common being tuberculosis (26%) followed by fungal infections (2%). Rarely, infections like nocardia, actinomycosis, and hydatidosis were also identified. Eight cases (3%) of malignancy were identified which included two cases of adenocarcinoma, one case of small cell carcinoma, three cases of poorly differentiated carcinoma, and two cases suspicious for malignancy. Some rare diagnoses like diffuse alveolar damage, pulmonary alveolar microlithiasis, and pulmonary alveolar proteinosis could be identified on BAL. Conclusion: BAL is useful in primary diagnosis of infections and malignancies of lower respiratory tract. BAL may aid in diagnostic workup of diffuse lung diseases. A combination of clinical information, high-resolution computed tomography, and BAL analysis may furnish an assured diagnosis to the clinician and obviate need for invasive procedures.
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.