Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17054132›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema.

L U Tiong, R Davies, P G Gibson, M J Hensley, R Hepworth, T J Lasserson, B Smith

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02882165 (A Quantitative Study in Early Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Using a Cluster Analysis, to Establish if Prospective, Individualised, Medical Intervention Alters Projected Clinical Course), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02882165 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

A Quantitative Study in Early Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Using a Cluster Analysis, to Establish if Prospective, Individualised, Medical Intervention Alters Projected Clinical Course

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of SouthamptonRan2015 to 2017Enrolled116ConditionsChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseArmsMedical review
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Aclidinium bromide for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. The fissure: interlobar collateral ventilation and implications for endoscopic therapy in emphysema.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2016
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) evidentiary framework.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2012
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

L U TiongLyell McEwin Health Service, General Medicine, 380 Carrington St., Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. leongung@gmail.com
R Davies
P G Gibson
M J Hensley
R Hepworth
T J Lasserson
B Smith

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been re-introduced for treating patients with severe diffuse emphysema. It is a procedure that aims to improve long-term daily functioning, although it is costly and may also be associated with a high risk of mortality.

objectivesTo assemble evidence from randomised controlled trials for the effectiveness of LVRS, and identify optimal surgical techniques. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) register. Searches are current to September 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that studied the safety and efficacy of LVRS in patients with diffuse emphysema were included. Studies were excluded if they investigated giant or bullous emphysema. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data. Where possible, data from more than one study were combined using RevMan 4.2 software. MAIN

resultsEight studies (1663 participants) met the entry criteria of the review. One study accounted for 73% of the participants recruited. Study quality was high, although blinding in studies was not possible. Ninety day mortality was significantly greater in all those who underwent LVRS (odds ratio 6.57 (95% CI 3.34 to 12.95), four studies, N = 1415). A subgroup analysis by risk status suggested that there was a subgroup of participants who were consistently at a significant risk of death, although this was only measured in one large study. The ninety day mortality data indicated that death was more likely with LVRS irrespective of risk status identified in one large study. Improvements in lung function, quality of life and exercise capacity were more likely with LVRS than with usual follow-up. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe evidence summarised in this review is drawn from one large study, and several smaller trials. The findings from the large study indicated that in patients who survive up to three months post-surgery, there were significantly better health status and lung function outcomes in favour of surgery compared with usual medical care. Patients identified post hoc as being of high risk of death from surgery were those with particularly impaired lung function and poor diffusing capacity and/or homogenous emphysema. Further research should address the effect of this intervention on exacerbations and rate of decline in lung function and health status.

Indexed as

EmphysemaHumansLaser TherapyLungPneumonectomyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSutures

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.