Table 4. Subgroup analysis of diagnostic yield.
| Subgroup | No. of studies | Pooled RD of diagnostic yield | Heterogeneity (I2) | Subgroup difference (P value) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study design | 0.14 | |||
| RCT | 7* | 0.10 (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.17) | 55% | |
| No-RCT | 11 | 0.16 (95% CI: 0.12 to 0.20) | 21% | |
| Main sampling sites | 0.005 | |||
| Solid pulmonary lesions | 6 | 0.16 (95% CI: 0.12 to 0.20) | 10% | |
| Hilar/mediastinal lymph nodes | 10* | 0.07 (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.12) | 0% | |
| Diagnostic method | 0.2 | |||
| c-TBNA | 5 | 0.11 (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.18) | 29% | |
| EBUS-TBNA | 7 | 0.08 (95% CI: 0.04 to 0.12) | 29% | |
| CT-guided TTFNA | 3 | 0.16 (95% CI: 0.08 to 0.25) | 0% | |
| Population | 0.98 | |||
| Unselected patients | 4 | 0.11 (95% CI: −0.07 to 0.28) | 77% | |
| Suspected sarcoidosis | 1* | 0.15 (95% CI: −0.24 to 0.54) | 72% | |
| Suspected/diagnosed lung cancer | 9 | 0.12 (95% CI: 0.06 to 0.18) | 52% |
*, one study provided a diagnostic yield of c-TBNA and EBUS-TBNA separately. RD, risk difference; RCT, random controlled trial; c-TBNA, conventional transbronchial needle aspiration; EBUS, endobronchial ultrasound; TTFNA, transthoracic fine needle aspiration.