ArticleTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease
Diagnostic yield using electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy for peripheral pulmonary nodules <2 cm.
Article in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. 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.
- Predictors of Diagnostic Yield in Shape-Sensing Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy (ssRAB): A Retrospective Single-Center Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Investigating Partial Registration for Optimizing Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy Evaluations of Peripheral Lung Nodules (I-PROBE).CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB) is highly sensitive in the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary nodules (PPNs), its diagnostic yield for subgroups of smaller PPNs is under evaluation.
objectivesDiagnostic yield evaluation of biopsy using ENB for PPNs <2 cm.
designThe diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the ENB-mediated biopsy for PPNs were evaluated.
methodsPatients who had PPNs with diameters <2 cm and underwent ENB-mediated biopsy between May 2015 and February 2020 were consecutively enrolled. The final diagnosis was made
resultsA total of 82 lesions from 65 patients were analyzed. The median tumor size was 11 mm. All lesions were subjected to ENB-mediated biopsy, of which 29 and 53 were classified as malignant and benign, respectively. Subsequent segmentectomy, lobectomy, or wedge resection, following pathological examinations were performed on 64 nodules from 57 patients. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for nodules <2 cm were 53.3%, 91.7%, 92.3%, and 51.2%, respectively. The receiver operating curve showed an area under the curve of 0.721 (
conclusionENB has good specificity and positive predictive value for diagnosing PPNs <2 cm; however, the spiculated sign may negatively affect ENB diagnostic accuracy. In addition, the diagnostic reliability may only be limited to PPNs equal to or larger than 1 cm.
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.