ArticleCHEST pulmonary2026
Investigating Partial Registration for Optimizing Robotic-Assisted Bronchoscopy Evaluations of Peripheral Lung Nodules (I-PROBE).
Article in CHEST pulmonary, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Best practices in shape-sensing robotic bronchoscopy with mobile cone beam computed tomography guidance: how I do it.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic-assisted bronchoscopy has transformed the diagnostic approach to lung cancer by improving access to peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs). Among these platforms, shape-sensing robotic-assisted bronchoscopy (ssRAB) relies on registration techniques to align virtual airway maps with patient anatomy. However, conventional full registration may not be essential for optimal accuracy and potentially add unnecessary time. We evaluated the novel technique of partial registration and assessed its feasibility and efficacy during ssRAB. Research Question: During ssRAB, how does partial registration impact the technical accuracy in targeting PPLs compared to full registration? Study Design and Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted on 22 patients undergoing ssRAB for tissue diagnosis of PPLs < 2 cm in size. The accuracy of lesion localization was determined by the target center distance (TCD), which is the difference between the plan's predicted target center after registration and the intraprocedural cone-beam CT target center. The mean TCD values were calculated for full and partial registration techniques and compared. Results: There was significant improvement in TCD with partial registration over full registration. Specifically, for full registration, the mean TCD was 9.23 mm. In contrast, partial registration achieved a mean TCD of 7.00 mm, suggesting enhanced accuracy with the partial registration technique ( Interpretation: Our results indicate that partial registration offers a feasible and efficient alternative for targeting small PPLs during ssRAB. These findings suggest that the full registration may not be necessary, because partial registration demonstrates comparable lesion localization accuracy-and possibly superior in certain cases. Further research is warranted to confirm these technical advantages and to confirm whether they translate into improved diagnostic outcomes.
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.