ArticleThoracic cancer2026
Intraoperative Rapid On-Site Evaluation (ROSE) vs. Frozen Section in Lung Surgery: A Prospective Study on Diagnostic Speed and Accuracy.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFrozen section (FS) is the most widely used method to assess resected pulmonary lesions intraoperatively, although it also prolongs the operation time. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of intraoperative rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) and evaluate whether it can serve as a faster auxiliary judgment alongside FS.
methodsA prospective study was conducted on patients undergoing complete resection. Rapid Romanowsky (DiffQuik) staining was used for ROSE. The results of intraoperative ROSE were compared with those of frozen section and final pathological diagnosis.
resultsA total of 75 patients were enrolled in the study, and 81 samples were taken for ROSE, which could assess biopsied samples within a few minutes. The time required for ROSE is significantly shorter than that for intraoperative frozen section analysis, and the mean time to diagnosis was significantly shorter for ROSE (by surgeon) than for FS (9.75 min vs. 29.70 min, p < 0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of ROSE was 90.1% for surgeons, 95.6% for experienced pathologists, and 81.5% for junior pathologists, respectively.
conclusionROSE can serve as an auxiliary judgment tool, enabling frozen sections to make intraoperative decisions more rapidly. It is a valuable technique for diagnosing lung tumor intraoperatively.
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.