ArticleERJ open research2024
Utility of adding oesophageal to endobronchial endosonography when staging lung cancer: a randomised trial.
Article in ERJ open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Operating Room? Cytology-Based Yield and Resource Utilization of Outpatient Versus Operating Room EBUS-TBNA Pathways.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic yield and feasibility of EBUS-guided cautery-assisted transbronchial forceps biopsy for suspected benign mediastinal and hilar lymphadenopathy: a prospective self-controlled pilot study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic yield and histopathological assessment of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial mediastinal cryobiopsy: a prospective comparison of two tunnelling approaches.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Clinical Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) and Endobronchial Ultrasound (EBUS) in the Evaluation of Mediastinal Lymphadenopathy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Both combined endobronchial ultrasonography (EBUS) and transoesophageal bronchoscopic ultrasonography (EUS-B) and EBUS alone have been recommended for preoperative mediastinal staging of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, no randomised study comparing these two methods has been published. The purpose of the present study was to compare the sensitivity of EBUS and that of combined EBUS and EUS-B (EBUS/EUS-B) in terms of detecting N2/N3 disease during staging of NSCLC. Methods: Patients with known or suspected, potentially operable NSCLC were recruited and randomised to undergo EBUS or EBUS/EUS-B under conscious sedation. The primary end-point was a comparison of the sensitivity of EBUS alone and EBUS/EUS-B. Results: A total of 240 patients were enrolled and randomised, among whom 219 (105 EBUS group; 114 EBUS/EUS-B group) were included in the analysis. The sensitivities of EBUS and EBUS/EUS-B in terms of detecting N2/N3 disease were 75.0% and 79.3% respectively (p=0.698). In the EBUS/EUS-B group, only EUS-B yielded diagnostic results in two patients; the sensitivity thus increased from 72.4% to 79.3% on addition of EUS-B to EBUS. Conclusions: The difference in the sensitivities of EBUS alone and EBUS/EUS-B in terms of diagnosing N2/N3 disease was not statistically significant. Although the increase in sensitivity with the addition of EUS-B is modest, it is maximised when EUS-B is used to sample lymph nodes not accessible by EBUS alone.
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.