SynthesisBMJ open respiratory research2024
Is there a role for fibreoptic bronchoscopy in patients presenting with haemoptysis and negative CT? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open respiratory research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances and challenges in the management of haemoptysis in the emergency department: A narrative review.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society · 2026Article
- Value of bronchoscopy after computed tomography in the diagnostic work-up of haemoptysis.European clinical respiratory journal · 2025Article
- Diagnostic yield of bronchoscopy in hemoptysis without radiological abnormalities: A retrospective cohort study.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHaemoptysis can be a feature of lung cancer and patients are typically fast-tracked for evaluation with chest radiography, contrast-enhanced CT and fibreoptic bronchoscopy (FOB).
objectiveWe aim to explore whether FOB should be conducted as a component of the routine evaluation of non-massive haemoptysis, especially in the context of suspected lung cancer.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for studies comparing FOB with CT in the evaluation of non-massive haemoptysis while reporting at least one of the listed primary outcomes. Primary outcomes include sensitivity of diagnostic modality with respect to lung cancer. Secondary outcomes include detection of other aetiologies such as infection. Results were synthesised using a random effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis was performed for patient age group and year of study. Risk of bias assessment was carried out with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.
resultsA total of 2273 citations were screened and 11 studies were included, comprising a total sample size of 2015 patients with 226 confirmed cases of lung cancer. A total of 1816 and 1734 patients received a CT scan and FOB, respectively. The pooled sensitivities for detection of lung cancer using CT scan and bronchoscopy were 98% (95% CI 93.0% to 99.0%) and 86% (95% CI 63.0% to 95.0%), respectively. The sensitivity of CT was higher than that of FOB for both primary and secondary outcomes.
conclusionThis study suggests that bronchoscopy does not offer significant additional diagnostic benefit in the evaluation of patients presenting with non-massive haemoptysis and a negative CT scan.
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.