ArticleBMJ open2025
Comparison of diagnostic yield and safety of three endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial biopsy techniques in diagnosing patients with mediastinal/hilar lymphadenopathy: a protocol of multicentre randomised trial in China.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06262620 (The Comparison of Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration, Mediastinal Cryobiopsy Via a Tunnel, and Forceps Biopsy Via a Tunnel in Diagnosing Mediastinal Lymphadenopathy), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
The Comparison of Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration, Mediastinal Cryobiopsy Via a Tunnel, and Forceps Biopsy Via a Tunnel in Diagnosing Mediastinal Lymphadenopathy: a Multicenter Randomised Controlled Trial.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMediastinal and/or hilar lymphadenopathy (MHL) is increasingly identified owing to various underlying conditions. Minimally invasive biopsy techniques, including endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA), transbronchial mediastinal cryobiopsy (TBMC) and transbronchial forceps biopsy (TBFB), are common diagnosis tools. However, their safety and diagnostic efficiency remain unclear. This trial aims to compare the diagnostic yield and safety of these three techniques. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a three-arm, parallel-design, randomised controlled trial involving 972 adult patients with MHL recruited from multiple medical centres. Participants will be randomly assigned to the EBUS-TBNA, TBMC via a tunnel or TBFB via a tunnel group. The primary outcome is diagnostic yield, and the secondary outcomes include diagnostic sensitivity, sample quality and procedure-related complications. Statistical analyses will be conducted using the appropriate methods. An independent sample χ² test will be used to test the differences in the diagnostic yield and incidence of procedure-related complications. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the China-Japan Friendship Hospital Ethics Committee (2022-KY-194).Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients or their guardians before their enrolment in the study. This study will be conducted per the principles established in the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Council for Harmonisation Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT06262620).
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.