ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
The impact of anesthesia methods and rapid on-site evaluation on the diagnosis of lung cancer using endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: a retrospective study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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.
- Beyond the Operating Room? Cytology-Based Yield and Resource Utilization of Outpatient Versus Operating Room EBUS-TBNA Pathways.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Endobronchial Ultrasonography (EBUS) with Lymph Node Aspiration: On-site Evaluation and Final Pathology Correlation.Thoracic research and practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a critical method for diagnosing lung cancer. While EBUS-TBNA is commonly performed under conscious sedation, the potential benefits of conducting the procedure under general anesthesia and incorporating rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) to enhance diagnostic yield remain uncertain. This study aims to investigate the impact of anesthesia methods and ROSE on the diagnostic efficacy of EBUS-TBNA for lung cancer. Methods: This study collected data from patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA for suspected lung cancer in the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine at The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University from August 2018 to December 2023. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the anesthesia method used and whether ROSE was performed: the non-general anesthesia group (NGA group), the general anesthesia group (GA group), and the general anesthesia with ROSE group (RGA group). The study analyzed baseline characteristics, puncture details, diagnostic outcomes, and complications across the groups. Results: The number of puncture needles used in the RGA group was significantly lower than in the other two groups (P<0.001). Most patients received a definitive diagnosis, with malignant tumor diagnostic rates of 80.95%, 85.71%, and 93.44% in the NGA, GA, and RGA groups, respectively (P=0.12). The overall disease diagnostic rates were 76.06%, 79.22%, and 86.11%, respectively (P=0.30). No severe complications occurred in any of the groups. The proportion of patients willing to undergo repeat EBUS-TBNA was significantly lower in the NGA group compared to the other two groups (P=0.002). Conclusions: Compared to local anesthesia combined with intravenous analgesia and sedation or general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia combined with ROSE reduces the number of puncture needles required during EBUS-TBNA but does not further improve diagnostic efficacy.
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.