ArticleScientific reports2024
Clinical utility of rapid on-site evaluation of brush cytology during bronchoscopy using endobronchial ultrasound with a guide sheath.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Diagnostic accuracy of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) during robotic bronchoscopy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Association and Predictive Ability between Inflammatory Burden Index and Fever Following Endobronchial Forceps Biopsy in Lung Cancer Patients.Journal of inflammation research · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) improves the diagnostic yield of bronchoscopy using endobronchial ultrasound with a guide sheath (EBUS-GS) for peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPL). While ROSE of imprint cytology from forceps biopsy has been widely discussed, there are few reports on ROSE of brush cytology. This study investigated the utility of ROSE of brush cytology during bronchoscopy. We retrospectively analyzed data from 214 patients who underwent bronchoscopy with EBUS-GS for PPL. The patients in the ROSE group had significantly higher diagnostic sensitivity through the entire bronchoscopy process than in the non-ROSE group (96.8% vs. 83.3%, P = 0.002). The use of ROSE significantly increased the sensitivity of brush cytology with Papanicolaou staining (92.9% vs. 75.0%, P < 0.001). When ROSE was sequentially repeated on brushing specimens, initially negative ROSE results converted to positive in 79.5% of cases, and the proportion of specimens with high tumor cell counts increased from 42.1 to 69.0%. This study concludes that ROSE of brush cytology improves the diagnostic accuracy of bronchoscopy and enhances specimen quality through repeated brushing.
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.