ArticleCancers2024
Correlation of Bronchoscopy and CT in Characterizing Malignant Central Airway Obstruction.
Article in Cancers, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective comparison of fiberoptic endobronchial needle aspiration, bronchial brushing, and forceps biopsy for the diagnoses of canine exophytic tracheal and endobronchial masses, and submucosal infiltrations.The Journal of small animal practice · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional tracheo-bronchial reconstruction to plan endoscopic stent insertion for malignant upper airway stenosis.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMalignant Central Airway Obstruction (MCAO) presents a significant challenge in lung cancer management, with notable morbidity and mortality implications. While bronchoscopy is the established diagnostic standard for confirming MCAO and assessing obstruction subtype (intrinsic, extrinsic, mixed) and severity, Computed Tomography (CT) serves as an initial screening tool. However, the extent of agreement between CT and bronchoscopy findings for MCAO remains unclear.
methodsTo assess the correlation between bronchoscopy and CT, we conducted a retrospective review of 108 patients at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, analyzing CT and bronchoscopy results to document MCAO presence, severity, and subtype.
resultsCT correctly identified MCAO in 99% of cases (107/108). Agreement regarding obstruction subtype (80.8%, Cohen's κ = 0.683,
conclusionsCT demonstrates reasonable agreement with bronchoscopy in detecting obstruction. Nevertheless, when CT indicates a positive finding for MCAO, it is advisable to conduct bronchoscopy. This is because CT lacks reliability in determining the severity of obstruction and identifying the mucosal component of mixed disease.
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.