Comparison of computed tomography and guided bronchoscopy in the diagnosis of pulmonary nodules: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Open Medicine Pub Date : 2025-07-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1515/med-2024-1108
Yilin Wang, Xianhe Liang, Haitao Zhang, Jinhua Hao, Min Wei
{"title":"Comparison of computed tomography and guided bronchoscopy in the diagnosis of pulmonary nodules: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Yilin Wang, Xianhe Liang, Haitao Zhang, Jinhua Hao, Min Wei","doi":"10.1515/med-2024-1108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the diagnostic effects of computed tomography (CT) and bronchoscopy guided biopsy on pulmonary nodules.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>\"Subject words + free words\" were used to search four literature databases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The subject words were CT, bronchoscope-guided biopsy, pulmonary nodules, and diagnosis. The search is up to August 25, 2023. The retrieved literature was screened, and the literature with duplicate, review, incomplete data or article content and inconsistent with our research was deleted. Revman 5.4 was used for bias analysis of the literatures included in the analysis, and forest map, funnel map, and ROC curve were drawn to compare the accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of the two diagnostic methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2,622 articles were retrieved, and 8 articles were included in the study after screening. Bias analysis and funnel plot showed that eight included articles had higher quality and smaller bias. The sensitivity and specificity of the forest map were both 95% CI, and the sensitivity of CT diagnosis was better than that of bronchoscopy diagnosis, with similar specificity between the two groups. The funnel plot shows some heterogeneity in the literature on pulmonary nodules. The ROC curve shows that CT diagnosis is significantly superior to bronchoscopy diagnosis, with diagnostic accuracy approaching 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CT has significant advantages in detecting and diagnosing pulmonary nodules, as it can detect nodules in various parts of the lungs. However, bronchoscopy has significant advantages in diagnosing small pulmonary nodules.</p>","PeriodicalId":19715,"journal":{"name":"Open Medicine","volume":"20 1","pages":"20241108"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12258422/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2024-1108","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the diagnostic effects of computed tomography (CT) and bronchoscopy guided biopsy on pulmonary nodules.

Methods: "Subject words + free words" were used to search four literature databases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The subject words were CT, bronchoscope-guided biopsy, pulmonary nodules, and diagnosis. The search is up to August 25, 2023. The retrieved literature was screened, and the literature with duplicate, review, incomplete data or article content and inconsistent with our research was deleted. Revman 5.4 was used for bias analysis of the literatures included in the analysis, and forest map, funnel map, and ROC curve were drawn to compare the accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of the two diagnostic methods.

Results: A total of 2,622 articles were retrieved, and 8 articles were included in the study after screening. Bias analysis and funnel plot showed that eight included articles had higher quality and smaller bias. The sensitivity and specificity of the forest map were both 95% CI, and the sensitivity of CT diagnosis was better than that of bronchoscopy diagnosis, with similar specificity between the two groups. The funnel plot shows some heterogeneity in the literature on pulmonary nodules. The ROC curve shows that CT diagnosis is significantly superior to bronchoscopy diagnosis, with diagnostic accuracy approaching 100%.

Conclusion: CT has significant advantages in detecting and diagnosing pulmonary nodules, as it can detect nodules in various parts of the lungs. However, bronchoscopy has significant advantages in diagnosing small pulmonary nodules.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

计算机断层扫描和引导支气管镜在肺结节诊断中的比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:比较计算机断层扫描(CT)和支气管镜引导下活检对肺结节的诊断效果。方法:采用“主题词+自由词”检索Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science四个文献数据库。主题词是CT,支气管镜引导下的活检,肺结节和诊断。搜索将持续到2023年8月25日。对检索到的文献进行筛选,删除重复、复习、资料不完整或文章内容与我们的研究不一致的文献。采用Revman 5.4对纳入分析的文献进行偏倚分析,绘制森林图、漏斗图和ROC曲线,比较两种诊断方法的准确性、特异性和敏感性。结果:共检索到2622篇文献,筛选后纳入8篇文献。偏倚分析和漏斗图显示,8篇纳入的文献质量较高,偏倚较小。森林图的敏感性和特异性均为95% CI, CT诊断的敏感性优于支气管镜诊断,两组特异性相近。漏斗图显示肺结节的文献存在一定的异质性。ROC曲线显示CT诊断明显优于支气管镜诊断,诊断准确率接近100%。结论:CT对肺结节的发现和诊断具有明显优势,可以发现肺各部位的结节。然而,支气管镜检查在诊断小肺结节方面具有显著的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Open Medicine
Open Medicine Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
153
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Open Medicine is an open access journal that provides users with free, instant, and continued access to all content worldwide. The primary goal of the journal has always been a focus on maintaining the high quality of its published content. Its mission is to facilitate the exchange of ideas between medical science researchers from different countries. Papers connected to all fields of medicine and public health are welcomed. Open Medicine accepts submissions of research articles, reviews, case reports, letters to editor and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信