ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Efficacy and safety of cone-beam computed tomography-guided bronchoscopy for peripheral pulmonary lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. 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 Outcomes of Robotic Bronchoscopy in a Multidisciplinary, Multi-hospital Lung Nodule Program.The Journal of surgical research · 2026Observational
- Contrast-Enhanced Cone-Beam CT-Guided Robotic Bronchoscopic Biopsy of a Mediastinal Lymph Node Adjacent to Major Vascular Structures.Respirology case reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-guided bronchoscopy is increasingly utilized for diagnosing peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs). We carried out the meta-analysis for assessing the efficacy and safety of CBCT-guided bronchoscopy for PPLs. Methods: An extensive search in several databases was conducted to identify relevant articles. We evaluated the quality of studies with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. The pooled diagnostic yield (DY) and adverse event rate with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were computed. Subgroup analyses were performed according to additional use of navigation, use of radial endobronchial ultrasound (rEBUS), use of fixed or mobile CBCT, whether computed tomography (CT) spin was performed before biopsy to affirm tool-in-lesion, use of rapid onsite cytologic examination (ROSE), strictness of the definition of DY, and study design. Further analysis was performed to explore the association between odds of diagnosis with CBCT guided bronchoscopy and PPLs characteristics (>20 Results: We included 23 studies involving 1,769 patients and 1,863 PPLs in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled DY of CBCT-guided bronchoscopy was 80.2% (95% CI: 76.0-84.1%). Subgroup analysis showed that the DY was highest when CBCT was used with robotic-assisted navigation bronchoscopy (pooled DY 87.5%; 95% CI: 81.5-92.4%), the DY was 78.9% (95% CI: 70.8-85.9%) when CBCT was used alone without other navigation techniques. Lesion size >20 mm, presence of bronchus sign and solid lesions were associated with significant increase in the odds of diagnosis with CBCT-guided bronchoscopy. Pooled adverse event rate was 2.3% (95% CI: 1.2-3.6%). Conclusions: CBCT-guided bronchoscopy is a safe technique with high DY in diagnosing PPLs.
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.