ArticleCureus2024
Understanding the Landscape of Bronchoscopy in Lung Cancer: Insights From Lesion Location, Gender, and Diagnostic Efficacy.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a nomogram integrating multi-dimensional clinical factors for predicting lung cancer-related mediastinal/hilar lymph node metastasis before endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: A molecular perspective.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung cancer constitutes a critical global health concern. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer's (IARC) GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates, lung cancer is the leading cause of death in cancer patients. In areas where tuberculosis is prevalent, misdiagnosis and mistreatment frequently result from overlap, creating significant difficulties that delay diagnosis and treatment. Amid this complication, bronchoscopic techniques emerge as critical diagnostic tools, though their efficacy varies between studies.
methodOur retrospective study, conducted from July 2021 to December 2022 at the Department of Respiratory Medicine, Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi Memorial Medical College, Kanpur, examined 156 participants with malignancies. Our focus encompassed diverse lesions within the bronchial landscape, revealing intriguing findings.
resultsBronchoscopic examinations unravelled prevalent abnormalities: 52 (33.3%) manifested as intraluminal growth, 48 (31.6%) as mucosal irregularities, and a less frequent (16, 10.3%) as an intraluminal bulge. Transbronchial needle aspiration stood out with a 10/11 (91%) positivity rate, biopsy came in second at 38/46 (83%), and bronchoalveolar lavage showed a 44/152 (29%) positivity rate. It was interesting to see how the lesions were spread out among the different types of histology. For example, squamous cell carcinoma showed 17/37 (46%) intraluminal growth, while adenocarcinoma showed 22/60 (36.7%) intraluminal growth and 4/60 (6.7%) intraluminal bulge. Moreover, a significant absence of abnormalities was observed in various lesions, underlining the intricacies of characterising bronchial lesions.
conclusionOur study shows that direct tissue sampling is better and that new bronchoscopic technologies are important for diagnosing lesions that were hard to get to in the past. However, limitations in patient selection biases and the single-centre focus caution against generalised interpretations. Our research illuminates the pivotal role of bronchoscopic methods in diagnosing lung lesions, emphasising the necessity for continued advancements to enhance diagnostic accuracy and treatment efficacy in lung cancer subtypes.
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.