Observational studyEuropean radiology2025
Multicenter external validation of a novel aggregated technique for percutaneous CT guided lung biopsy for multiple samplings: the ExtraPEARL study.
Observational study in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic yield and predictors of complications in CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy: an analysis based on ATS/ACCP criteria.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- From Blue Ocean Strategy to Mare Nostrum Tactics: The Challenges of Interventional Radiology in the Thoracic Arena.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- Navigational Bronchoscopy Versus Transthoracic Needle Biopsy for Solid Peripheral Lung Nodules: Complementary Rather than Competitors?Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the reproducibility of the PEARL approach to decrease pneumothorax rates by different board-certified radiologists across multiple medical centers using standard CT units. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis multicenter observational study included four average volume centers in two countries. Data for the PEARL cohort were prospectively collected between January 2022 and May 2023, while the control cohort data were retrospectively collected from procedures performed between June 2021 and April 2022. Patient demographics, lesion characteristics, intraprocedural data, complications, and procedural accuracy were compared.
resultsA total of 413 CT-guided lung biopsies were performed (204 PEARL vs 209 Control) without differences in patient demographics, lesion size (26.8 mm ± 20.3 PEARL group vs 27.7 mm ± 19.6 Control, p = 0.4), or emphysema rate (34% PEARL vs 27% Control, p = 0.15). Adequate pathological yield was observed in both groups (PEARL group 95%, Control group 97%; p = 0.255). The overall incidence of pneumothorax was 9% (18/204) in the PEARL vs 23% in the control group (48/209); p < 0.05. Chest tube insertion was necessary in one patient in the PEARL group (0.5%), and in nine in the Control (4%); p = 0.011.
conclusionsApplication of PEARL protocol for CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of lung nodules provides a reproducible method across multiple institutions and physicians to maintain a high diagnostic yield while significantly reducing pneumothorax risk. KEY POINTS: Question Reducing the rate of pneumothorax following percutaneous lung biopsy is crucial. The PEARL approach was proposed in an interventional radiology single-center study; external validation still missing. Findings The PEARL approach effectively reduced pneumothorax incidence, with only one chest tube insertion in 204 cases, and both groups demonstrated adequate pathological yield. Clinical relevance The PEARL protocol demonstrated efficiency and cost-effectiveness in minimizing pneumothorax risk during percutaneous CT-guided lung biopsies in a multicenter study, with board-certified radiologists using standard CT equipment in average-volume centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40055230What 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.