ArticlePloS one2026
Diagnostic yield and complication rate of transbronchial lung cryobiopsy using 1.1 mm probe in patients with interstitial lung disease.
Article in PloS one, 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
backgroundWidespread adoption of transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) using a 1.9 or 2.4 mm touch cryoprobe in interstitial lung disease (ILD) has been limited by high bleeding risk. Recent studies have demonstrated that the 1.1 mm cryoprobe via conventional bronchoscope may achieve diagnostic yields comparable to larger probes while maintaining a favorable safety profile. Studies of the 1.1 mm touch cryoprobe in the diagnosis of ILD have been flawed and conflicting.
aimThe aim of this study is to describe the complication rate, diagnostic yield, and factors that increase diagnostic yield of TBLC using a 1.1 mm touch cryoprobe in patients with ILD.
methodsThe retrospective cohort study included patients that were prospectively identified in the ILD clinic registry at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (UTSW) who underwent TBLC from 2022-2026. Procedural characteristics were recorded. Patients were assigned a pre-TBLC, post-TBLC, and final diagnosis.
resultsThis study demonstrates that TBLC using a 1.1 mm probe added to BAL significantly increases diagnostic yield with an 11% risk of pneumothorax and a 6.5% risk of bleeding. The combination of BAL and TBLC was diagnostic in 27 (43.5%) of patients and led to a change in diagnosis in 27 (43.5%) of patients. The number of TBLC samples taken is associated with a higher diagnostic yield.
conclusionThe diagnostic yield and complication rates of the 1.1 mm touch probe in our study are higher than previously reported studies with TBBx but lower than 1.9 and 2.4 mm touch probes, though there was no direct comparison group in our study. To increase yield of the procedure, multiple lobes should be biopsied and more samples taken.
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.