ArticleERJ open research2026
The addition of radial endobronchial ultrasound to electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy: the NEBULA study - a randomised controlled trial.
Article in ERJ open research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bronchoscopic biopsies are a valuable tool for diagnosing small peripheral lung lesions suspected of cancer. Electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB) has been developed to guide the bronchoscopist to the lesion and radial endobronchial ultrasound (rEBUS) to confirm the presence lesion once reached. The combination of modalities might improve the diagnostic yield; however, only a few studies with diverting results have been published. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the combination of rEBUS and ENB is superior to ENB alone for diagnosing peripheral lung lesions suspected of lung cancer in a pragmatic study setting representing the daily clinical practices and challenges. Methods: The study was conducted according to CONSORT guidelines. All patients were randomised for either ENB or ENB+rEBUS. The reference test was either a final histopathologic diagnosis or determined by 6 months of computed tomography surveillance. Analyses were performed using intention-to-treat, with only procedures with a definitive diagnosis categorised as "diagnostic". Results: Of 200 patients included from four centres, 183 were randomised and included in the final analyses. There was no difference in diagnostic yield between the two groups (43.8% Conclusion: ENB+rEBUS is a safe and well-tolerated procedure, but not superior to ENB alone.
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.