ArticleThe clinical respiratory journal2024
Evaluation of the diagnostic role of radial probe endobronchial ultrasound for peripheral pulmonary lesions.
Article in The clinical respiratory journal, 2024. 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.
- Remimazolam-Remifentanil versus Propofol-Remifentanil for Spontaneous Ventilation During Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Current medical science · 2025Trial
- A predictive model for diagnosing peripheral pulmonary lesions using radial probe endobronchial ultrasound images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Radial Endobronchial Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Peripherally Located Pulmonary Lesions.Cureus · 2025Article
- Optimizing diagnostic yield in pulmonary lesions: impact of combined sampling tools and EBUS-TBNA during radial EBUS.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseObservational
- Bronchoscopic removal of bronchial carcinoid tumors: Case series and literature review.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the predictive value of echo features of radial probe endobronchial ultrasound (RP-EBUS) in the differential diagnosis of malignant and benign 1esions.
methodsThe clinical data of 336 patients with peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs) undergoing RP-EBUS were analyzed in order to evaluate the predictive value of the three EBUS echo features including continuous margin, absence of a linear-discrete air bronchogram, and heterogeneous in pulmonary lesions. The sensitivity and specificity for each echoic feature or in combination in diagnosing malignancy or benignity were determined.
results336 cases of PPLs including 216 cases of malignant lesions and 120 cases of benign lesions. The sensitivity and specificity of the continuous margin to the diagnosis of malignant lesions were 86.11% and 17.50%. The sensitivity and specificity of the absence of a linear-discrete air bronchogram to the diagnosis of malignant lesions were 66.67% and 57.50%, and the positive predictive value was 73.85%. The sensitivity and specificity of heterogeneity to the diagnosis of malignant lesions were 65.28% and 72.50%, and the positive predictive value was 81.03%. The combination of heterogeneous and absence of a linear-discrete air bronchogram could improve the diagnostic specificity to 87.50%, and the positive predictive value to 80.77%.
conclusionThe two EBUS echo features of heterogeneous and absence of a linear-discrete air bronchogram have predictive value for PPLs, especially in the presence of two features the pulmonary lesions should be highly suspected malignant tumors.
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.