Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21562918›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2012

A modified two-port thoracoscopic technique versus axillary minithoracotomy for the treatment of recurrent spontaneous pneumothorax: a prospective randomized study.

Christophoros N Foroulis, Kyriakos Anastasiadis, Nicholas Charokopos, Polychronis Antonitsis, Polychronis Antonitisis, Homerus V Halvatzoulis, George T Karapanagiotidis, Vassilis Grosomanidis, Christos Papakonstantinou

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT01192217 (A Prospective Randomized Study of a Modified Two-port Thoracoscopic Technique Versus Axillary Minithoracotomy for the Treatment of Recurrent Spontaneous Pneumothorax.), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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.

NCT01192217 nacompletednot on this map

A Prospective Randomized Study of a Modified Two-port Thoracoscopic Technique Versus Axillary Minithoracotomy for the Treatment of Recurrent Spontaneous Pneumothorax.

TypeinterventionalSponsorAHEPA University HospitalRan2006 to 2009Enrolled66ConditionsPneumothoraxArmsModified thoracoscopic technique, Axillary mini-thoracotomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Surgery for primary spontaneous pneumothorax.Journal of thoracic disease · 2016
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Minimally invasive procedures.Annals of translational medicine · 2015
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    Antonitisis, Polychronis [corrected to Antonitsis, Polychronis]
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christophoros N ForoulisDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Aristotle University Medical School, AHEPA University Hospital, Stilponos Kiriakidi Street, 54636, Thessaloniki, Greece. cforoulis@otenet.gr
Kyriakos Anastasiadis
Nicholas Charokopos
Polychronis Antonitsis
Polychronis Antonitisis
Homerus V Halvatzoulis
George T Karapanagiotidis
Vassilis Grosomanidis
Christos Papakonstantinou
AHEPA University Hospital · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently, most thoracic surgeons perform surgical pleurodesis for recurrent spontaneous pneumothorax (RSP) by video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). However, the superiority of VATS over axillary minithoracotomy is not been established in prospective studies to date. A modified two-port VATS technique and axillary minithoracotomy were prospectively evaluated for possible differences in the short- and long-term outcome for patients.

methodsIn this study, 66 consecutive patients underwent surgical pleurodesis for RSP through either a modified two-port VATS procedure (group A, 33 patients) or axillary minithoracotomy (group B, 33 patients). According to the study design (NCT01192217), the patients were randomly assigned to the two groups, which were similar in terms of age and body mass index. One-lung ventilation time, histology of the available lung parenchyma specimens, early postoperative complications, length of chest tube drainage and hospital stay, recurrence rate, and a score for patient satisfaction with treatment based on the sum of postoperative pain, dependent-arm mobilization, and return to full activity subscores were evaluated. The follow-up period varied from 3 to 53 months (median, 30 months).

resultsThe one-lung ventilation and operating times were significantly longer (p < 0.001) in group A than in group B. The overall detection of blebs, bulla, or both was 51.5% in group A and 63.8% in group B. The recurrence rate, complication rate, postoperative chest tube drainage duration, postoperative hospital stay, and incidence of chronic pain did not differ between the two groups. The score for patient satisfaction with treatment was significantly higher in group A than in group B (p < 0.001) according the subscores for better dependent-arm mobilization and return to full activity.

conclusionsAxillary minithoracotomy and VATS are equally effective for the treatment of RSP, although the rate for resection of blebs, bulla, or both is higher with the axillary minithoracotomy procedure. Although VATS is more time consuming, it offers to the patient more satisfaction with treatment.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedChest TubesChildDrainageFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPneumothoraxPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID21562918
OpenAlexW2088089031

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.