↓ Skip to main content

Radial-probe EBUS for the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal de Pneumologia, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Radial-probe EBUS for the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions
Published in
Jornal de Pneumologia, January 2016
DOI 10.1590/s1806-37562015000000079
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcia Jacomelli, Sergio Eduardo Demarzo, Paulo Francisco Guerreiro Cardoso, Addy Lidvina Mejia Palomino, Viviane Rossi Figueiredo

Abstract

Conventional bronchoscopy has a low diagnostic yield for peripheral pulmonary lesions. Radial-probe EBUS employs a rotating ultrasound transducer at the end of a probe that is passed through the working channel of the bronchoscope. Radial-probe EBUS facilitates the localization of peripheral pulmonary nodules, thus increasing the diagnostic yield. The objective of this study was to present our initial experience using radial-probe EBUS in the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions at a tertiary hospital. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 54 patients who underwent radial-probe EBUS-guided bronchoscopy for the investigation of pulmonary nodules or masses between February of 2012 and September of 2013. Radial-probe EBUS was performed with a flexible 20-MHz probe, which was passed through the working channel of the bronchoscope and advanced through the bronchus to the target lesion. For localization of the lesion and for collection procedures (bronchial brushing, transbronchial needle aspiration, and transbronchial biopsy), we used fluoroscopy. Radial-probe EBUS identified 39 nodules (mean diameter, 1.9 ± 0.7 cm) and 19 masses (mean diameter, 4.1 ± 0.9 cm). The overall sensitivity of the method was 66.7% (79.5% and 25.0%, respectively, for lesions that were visible and not visible by radial-probe EBUS). Among the lesions that were visible by radial-probe EBUS, the sensitivity was 91.7% for masses and 74.1% for nodules. The complications were pneumothorax (in 3.7%) and bronchial bleeding, which was controlled bronchoscopically (in 9.3%). Radial-probe EBUS shows a good safety profile, a low complication rate, and high sensitivity for the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions. A broncoscopia convencional possui baixo rendimento diagnóstico para lesões pulmonares periféricas. A ecobroncoscopia radial (EBUS radial) emprega um transdutor ultrassonográfico rotatório na extremidade de uma sonda que é inserida no canal de trabalho do broncoscópio. O EBUS radial facilita a localização de nódulos pulmonares periféricos, aumentando assim o rendimento diagnóstico. O objetivo deste estudo foi apresentar nossa experiência inicial com o uso de EBUS radial para o diagnóstico de lesões pulmonares periféricas em um hospital terciário. Foi realizada uma análise retrospectiva de 54 pacientes submetidos à broncoscopia guiada por EBUS radial para a investigação de nódulos ou massas pulmonares entre fevereiro de 2012 e setembro de 2013. O EBUS radial foi realizado com uma sonda flexível de 20 MHz, que foi inserida no canal de trabalho do broncoscópio até chegar à lesão-alvo. A fluoroscopia foi usada para localizar a lesão e realizar procedimentos de coleta (escovado brônquico, aspiração transbrônquica com agulha e biópsia transbrônquica). O EBUS radial identificou 39 nódulos (média de diâmetro: 1,9 ± 0,7 cm) e 19 massas (média de diâmetro: 4,1 ± 0,9 cm). A sensibilidade global do EBUS radial foi de 66,7% (79,5% para as lesões visíveis pelo método e 25% para as lesões não visíveis pelo método). Nas lesões visíveis pelo método, a sensibilidade foi de 91,7% para massas e de 74,1% para nódulos. As complicações foram pneumotórax (3,7%) e sangramento brônquico controlado broncoscopicamente (9,3%). O EBUS radial apresenta bom perfil de segurança, baixo índice de complicações e alta sensibilidade para o diagnóstico de lesões pulmonares periféricas.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 9 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2017.
All research outputs
#16,783,081
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pneumologia
#293
of 719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,469
of 400,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pneumologia
#23
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 719 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 400,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.