Also, in the guideline statement, the authors conclude that there is no available randomized trial comparing nasal and oral EBUS scope insertion. Out of interest, we would like to mention a randomized study that we recently completed and published comparing the two routes of insertion. A total of 110 subjects were randomized in each group. Our study did not find any significant difference regarding patient comfort, satisfaction, and willingness to repeat the procedure. The two groups also did not differ regarding EBUS-transbronchial needle aspiration diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy rate. It is worth noting that the EBUS bronchoscope could not be nasally inserted in 24.5% of patients in the nasal group. We thus concluded that both routes confer a high degree of comfort with similar complication rates and diagnostic yields.