↓ Skip to main content

High definition bronchoscopy: a randomized exploratory study of diagnostic value compared to standard white light bronchoscopy and autofluorescence bronchoscopy

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
High definition bronchoscopy: a randomized exploratory study of diagnostic value compared to standard white light bronchoscopy and autofluorescence bronchoscopy
Published in
Respiratory Research, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12931-015-0193-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erik HFM van der Heijden, Wouter Hoefsloot, Hieronymus WH van Hees, Olga CJ Schuurbiers

Abstract

Videobronchoscopy is an essential diagnostic procedure for evaluation of the central airways and pivotal for the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer. Technological improvements have resulted in high definition (HD) images with advanced real time image enhancement techniques (i-scan). In this study we aimed to explore the sensitivity of HD+ i-scan bronchoscopy for detection of epithelial changes like vascular abnormalities and suspicious preinvasive lesions, and tumors. In patients scheduled for a therapeutic or diagnostic procedure under general anesthesia videos of the bronchial tree were made using 5 videobronchoscopy modes in random order: normal white light videobronchoscopy (WLB), HD-bronchoscopy (HD), HD bronchoscopy with surface enhancement technique (i-scan1), HD with surface- and tone enhancement technique (i-scan2) and dual mode autofluorescence videobronchoscopy (AFB). The videos were scored in random order by two independent and blinded expert bronchoscopists. In 29 patients all videos were available for analysis. Vascular abnormalities were scored most frequently in HD + i-scan2 bronchoscopy (1.33 ± 0.29 abnormal or suspicious sites per patient) as compared to 0.12 ± 0.05 site for AFB (P = 0.003). Sites suspicious for preinvasive lesions were most frequently reported using AFB (0.74 ± 0.12 sites per patient) as compared to 0.17 ± 0.06 for both WLB and HD bronchoscopy (P = 0.003). Tumors were detected equally by all modalities. The preferred modality was HD bronchoscopy with i-scan (tone- plus surface and surface enhancement in respectively 38% and 35% of cases P = 0.006). This study shows that high definition bronchoscopy with image enhancement technique may result in better detection of subtle vascular abnormalities in the airways. Since these abnormalities may be related to preneoplastic lesions and tumors this is of clinical relevance. Further investigations using this technique relating imaging to histology are warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Master 7 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 45%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 9 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 March 2015.
All research outputs
#14,388,554
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#1,347
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,801
of 273,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#26
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. 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 273,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.