Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42452523›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026

Advancing Transbronchial Lung Cryobiopsy in Interstitial Lung Disease with Adjunctive Tools and Smaller Cryoprobes.

Rosa Arancibia-Cacace, Sultana Alam, Michelle Siew

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rosa Arancibia-CacaceDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
Sultana AlamDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
Michelle SiewDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) is increasingly used as a minimally invasive approach for tissue acquisition in the evaluation of interstitial lung disease (ILD), serving as an alternative to surgical lung biopsy (SLB) within multidisciplinary diagnostic pathways. Despite its growing adoption, variability in diagnostic yield and complication rates highlight the importance of procedural technique, probe selection, and freezing parameters. This narrative review summarizes the current landscape of TBLC, with emphasis on factors that influence diagnostic performance and safety, including procedural considerations involving endobronchial balloon blockade (EBB), radial probe endobronchial ultrasound (RP-EBUS), and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for biopsy localization and airway management. Much of the existing experience is based on conventional cryoprobes, including 2.4 mm and 1.9 mm devices, typically used with freezing times of several seconds. While these approaches have defined the current role of TBLC in ILD, outcomes remain variable across centers, prompting continued refinement of procedural strategies to improve consistency. More recently, attention has expanded to include a broader range of smaller cryoprobe sizes-1.7 mm and 1.1 mm. Overall, this review provides a framework for understanding contemporary TBLC practice and highlights key areas where further study is needed to better define optimal technique and improve consistency in clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

1.1 mm and 1.7 mm cryoprobescryoprobesinterstitial lung diseasetransbronchial lung cryobiopsy

Identifiers

PMID42452523
PMCPMC13362417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.