Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 233

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Endosonography vs Conventional Bronchoscopy for the Diagnosis of Sarcoidosis: The GRANULOMA Randomized Clinical Trial

von Bartheld, Martin B., Dekkers, Olaf M., Szlubowski, Artur, Eberhardt, Ralf, Herth, Felix J., in ‘t Veen, Johannes C. C. M., de Jong, Ynze P., van der Heijden, Erik H. F. M., Tournoy, Kurt G., Claussen, Martin, van den Blink, Bernt, Shah, Pallav L., Zoumot, Zaid, Clementsen, Paul, Porsbjerg, Celeste, Mauad, Thais, Bernardi, Fabiola D., van Zwet, Erik W., Rabe, Klaus F., Annema, Jouke T.·2013·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Tissue verification of noncaseating granulomas is recommended for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Bronchoscopy with transbronchial lung biopsies, the current diagnostic standard, has moderate sensitivity in assessing granulomas. Endosonography with intrathoracic nodal aspiration appears to be a promising diagnostic technique. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic yield of bronchoscopy vs endosonography in the diagnosis of stage I/II sarcoidosis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized clinical multicenter trial (14 centers in 6 countries) between March 2009 and November 2011 of 304 consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary sarcoidosis (stage I/II) in whom tissue confirmation of noncaseating granulomas was indicated. INTERVENTIONS: Either bronchoscopy with transbronchial and endobronchial lung biopsies or endosonography (esophageal or endobronchial ultrasonography) with aspiration of intrathoracic lymph nodes. All patients also underwent bronchoalveolar lavage. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield for detecting noncaseating granulomas in patients with a final diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The diagnosis was based on final clinical judgment by the treating physician, according to all available information (including findings from initial bronchoscopy or endosonography). Secondary outcomes were the complication rate in both groups and sensitivity and specificity of bronchoalveolar lavage in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. RESULTS: A total of 149 patients were randomized to bronchoscopy and 155 to endosonography. Significantly more granulomas were detected at endosonography vs bronchoscopy (114 vs 72 patients; 74% vs 48%; P < .001). Diagnostic yield to detect granulomas for endosonography was 80% (95% CI, 73%-86%); for bronchoscopy, 53% (95% CI, 45%-61%) (P < .001). Two serious adverse events occurred in the bronchoscopy group and 1 in the endosonography group; all patients recovered completely. Sensitivity of the bronchoalveolar lavage for sarcoidosis based on CD4/CD8 ratio was 54% (95% CI, 46%-62%) for flow cytometry and 24% (95% CI, 16%-34%) for cytospin analysis. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with suspected stage I/II pulmonary sarcoidosis undergoing tissue confirmation, the use of endosonographic nodal aspiration compared with bronchoscopic biopsy resulted in greater diagnostic yield. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00872612.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2013.5823

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 233

Metadata

Authors
von Bartheld, M. B., Dekkers, O. M., Szlubowski, A., Eberhardt, R., Herth, F. J., in ‘t Veen, J. C. C. M., de Jong, Y. P., van der Heijden, E. H. F. M., Tournoy, K. G., Claussen, M., van den Blink, B., Shah, P. L., Zoumot, Z., Clementsen, P., Porsbjerg, C., Mauad, T., Bernardi, F. D., van Zwet, E. W., Rabe, K. F., & Annema, J. T.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2013-06-19
Volume
309
Issue
23
Pages
2457
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2091550741
Cited by
233
References
1
FWCI
17.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Endosonography vs Conventional Bronchoscopy for the Diagnosis of Sarcoidosis: The GRANULOMA Randomized Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2013.5823
The paper
von Bartheld, M. B., Dekkers, O. M., Szlubowski, A., Eberhardt, R., Herth, F. J., in ‘t Veen, J. C. C. M., de Jong, Y. P., van der Heijden, E. H. F. M., Tournoy, K. G., Claussen, M., van den Blink, B., Shah, P. L., Zoumot, Z., Clementsen, P., Porsbjerg, C., Mauad, T., Bernardi, F. D., van Zwet, E. W., Rabe, K. F., & Annema, J. T. (2013). Endosonography vs Conventional Bronchoscopy for the Diagnosis of Sarcoidosis: The GRANULOMA Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.5823

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.