ReviewRespirology (Carlton, Vic.)2025
Contemporary Concise Review 2024: New Techniques in Interventional Pulmonology.
Review in Respirology (Carlton, Vic.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mitigating lateral sensing blind spots: A dual-segment bronchoscopic robot with a bioinspired skin.Science advances · 2026Article
- Rescue Diagnosis of Upper-Lobar Station 12U Lymph Nodes Using the Thin Convex-Probe EBUS Bronchoscope (BF-UCP190F): A Report of Two Cases.Respirology case reports · 2026Article
- Recent advances in thoracic anesthesia: lung protection, airway management, and enhanced recovery-a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Comparison of learning curves between electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy and Ion robotic bronchoscopy for preoperative localization.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Recent advances in artificial intelligence across interventional pulmonology: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Contemporary Concise Review 2024: New Techniques in Interventional Pulmonology.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Navigational bronchoscopy and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) guided bronchoscopy show comparable yields to percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy of lung nodules. Robotic assisted bronchoscopy (RAB) with advanced imaging (CBCT or digital tomosynthesis) improves diagnostic yield further. Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) guided nodal cryobiopsy shows promise in certain clinical conditions. The thin EBUS convex probe (EBUS-CP) bronchoscope is on the horizon and has the potential to be the answer for the middle third. Guidelines and expert recommendations are sometimes needed where larger trial evidence may be lacking. Artificial intelligence is still finding its place in practice but shows promise for education and training.
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.