Table 1.

Characteristics of the studies describing the value of TBLC and r-EBUS for PPLs.

Author	Study Design	Number of Patients	Median Size of Biopsy Sample TBB vs. TBLC	Use of EBUS or Fluoroscopy	Comments
Nasu et al. [21]	Retrospective	53	2.62/14.1 mm2	r-EBUS + GS	Cryobiopsy with GS in PPLs with positive bronchus sign significantly increases diagnostic yield (OR = 11.6, p = 0.044)
Imabayashi et al. [22]	Retrospective	38	NA/12.2 mm2	r-EBUS	Diagnostic yield of CB increased from 86.1% to 91.6% when adding stamp cytology.
Schuhmann et al. [30]	Randomized controlled study	38	4.69/11.17 mm2	r-EBUS +GS	Time of TBLC was significantly longer when compared to TBB. Diagnostic yield was of 61.3% (19/31) for TBB and 74.2% (23/31) for TBLC (p = 0.42)
Arimura et al. [31]	Prospective	23	0.003 ± 0.0003/0.078 ± 0.008 (mean ± SEM) cm3	r-EBUS + GS + Fluoroscopy	Higher diagnostic accuracy for TBLB in comparison to TBB (87% versus 82.6%). Sufficient quantity and quality for DNA analysis by NGS.
Taton et. al. [32]	Prospective	32	1.1 ± 0.6/5.3 ± 0.7 mm	r-EBUS + GS	No statistically significant impact on the diagnostic yield for the location or size of nodule or the technique use (visualization with EBUS mini probe)
Hibare et al. [34]	Retrospective	55	NA	Radial EBUS ± GS ± Fluoroscopy	No significant difference was found in diagnostic yield between TBB or TBLC. 14% of lesions could not be located by r-EBUS
Kho et al. [35]	Retrospectve	114	NA	Radial EBUS ± GS ± Fluoroscopy	The addition of rapid on-site cytology (ROSE) increased the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and diagnostic accuracy
Herath et al. [36]	Prospective	6	3.4/6.4 mm	Radial EBUS + GS	The GS was trimmed by 3 cm from the distal end of the scope for a better contact.
Udagawa et al. [38]	Prospective	121	2/15 mm2	Radial EBUS ± GS + Fluoroscopy	Larger amounts of DNA and RNA with TBLC (a median of 1.60 µg DNA and 0.62 µg RNA with cryoprobe vs. 0.58 µg DNA and 0.17 µg RNA with forceps).