ArticleRespiratory research & clinical practice2026
Transbronchial lung cryobiopsy and surgical lung biopsy for interstitial lung diseases: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Respiratory research & clinical practice, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) relies on multidisciplinary discussion. However, when uncertainty persists, histopathological evaluation is required. Surgical lung biopsy (SLB) offers high diagnostic yield but carries relevant morbidity and non-negligible mortality. Although transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) has emerged as a less invasive alternative, its economic impact on middle-income countries remains underexplored. This study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TBLC in comparison with that of SLB for the diagnosis of ILDs from the perspective of the Brazilian public health care system. Methods: A decision tree model compared three strategies in a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients: standalone TBLC, standalone SLB, and a step-up strategy starting with TBLC and reserving SLB for inconclusive cases. Model probabilities were obtained from an umbrella review and Brazilian public health care system data. Direct medical costs were estimated by microcosting. Sensitivity analyses assessed model robustness. Results: Mean costs (in Brazilian reals [BRL]) were BRL 5,623.34 for TBLC and BRL 22,855.94 for SLB (including hospitalization). The step-up strategy was the most cost-effective, yielding higher effectiveness than standalone SLB and saving approximately BRL 1.3 million per 100 patients. The step-up approach remained dominant in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: In the Brazilian public health care system, a step-up diagnostic pathway using TBLC first and SLB only if necessary maximizes diagnostic yield while reducing costs, hospitalizations, and mortality. These findings support TBLC as the initial procedure of choice for ILD evaluation and reinforce alignment with international evidence. They may guide policy and resource allocation in Brazil and other countries with similar health care systems.
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.