ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Evaluation of the efficacy of different lung biopsy modalities in solitary pulmonary nodules.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study compared the diagnostic performance and safety of computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy (PTNB) and virtual bronchoscopic navigation (VBN)-guided transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB) in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 204 SPN patients, divided into CT-guided (n = 102) and VBN-guided (n = 102) groups. Parameters, including diagnostic yield, procedure time, and complication rates, were compared between the two methods. Results: After applying rigorous diagnostic criteria per ATS/ACCP guidelines, the overall diagnostic yield was higher in the VBN group (64.7%, 66/102) than in the CT group (59.8%, 61/102), though the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.472). In exploratory subgroup analyses, VBN demonstrated higher diagnostic yield for smaller nodules (8-20 mm) and those located closer to the pleura (2-3 cm) (both P < 0.05). For larger nodules (20-30 mm) or those further from the pleura (3-5 cm), diagnostic rates were comparable between groups. The VBN group had significantly shorter procedure times, including lesion localization (6.62 ± 0.93 vs. 9.27 ± 1.05 min) and total procedure duration (22.04 ± 2.36 vs. 38.16 ± 4.29 min) (P < 0.01). The complication rate was significantly lower in the VBN group (9.80% vs. 29.41%, P < 0.01), with the CT group showing higher incidences of pneumothorax, hemoptysis, and chest pain in nodules 2-3 cm from the pleura. Multivariate analysis identified several factors significantly associated with diagnostic outcomes. Additionally, the VBN group incurred lower medical costs and shorter hospital stays (P < 0.01). Conclusion: VBN-guided biopsy was associated with higher diagnostic yield, fewer complications, shorter procedure times, and lower costs compared to CT-guided biopsy. These findings warrant confirmation in prospective randomized trials.
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.