SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2011
Several clinical interests regarding lung volume reduction surgery for severe emphysema: meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Predictors of reoperation after lung volume reduction surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Impact of the type of initial intervention on the outcomes of lung volume reduction for emphysema: a propensity matched study.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Clinical observation of posterior scleral reinforcement in the treatment of progressive high myopia in Chinese children: a retrospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Lung Volume Reduction Surgery in Patients with Heterogenous Emphysema: Selecting Perspective.Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
- The Expressions of Hope in the Face of Complex Surgery: Experiences of Patients and Their Loved Ones.Journal of patient experience · 2019Article
- Comparison between the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D quality of life (QOL) questionnaires in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) undergoing lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS).Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019Article
- Pulmonary hypertension in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and emphysema patients: prevalence, therapeutic options and pulmonary circulatory effects of lung volume reduction surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Review
- Lung volume reduction surgery in hypercapnic patients: a single-center experience from China.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
- Single-lung transplantation in emphysema: Retrospective study analyzing survival and waiting list mortality.World journal of transplantation · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aim to address several clinical interests regarding lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) for severe emphysema using meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
methodsEight RCTs published from 1999 to 2010 were identified and synthesized to compare the efficacy and safety of LVRS vs conservative medical therapy. One RCT was obtained regarding comparison of median sternotomy (MS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). And three RCTs were available evaluating clinical efficacy of using bovine pericardium for buttressing, autologous fibrin sealant and BioGlue, respectively.
resultsOdds ratio (95%CI), expressed as the mortality of group A (the group underwent LVRS) versus group B (conservative medical therapies), was 5.16(2.84, 9.35) in 3 months, 3(0.94, 9.57) in 6 months, 1.05(0.82, 1.33) in 12 months, respectively. On the 3rd, 6th and 12th month, all lung function indices of group A were improved more significantly as compared with group B. PaO2 and PaCO2 on the 6th and 12th month showed the same trend. 6MWD of group A on the 6th month and 12th month were improved significantly than of group B, despite no difference on the 3rd month. Quality of life (QOL) of group A was better than of group B in 6 and 12 months. VATS is preferred to MS, due to the earlier recovery and lower cost. And autologous fibrin sealant and BioGlue seems to be the efficacious methods to reduce air leak following LVRS.
conclusionsLVRS offers the more benefits regarding survival, lung function, gas exchange, exercise capacity and QOL, despite the higher mortality in initial three postoperative months. LVRS, with the optimization of surgical approach and material for reinforcement of the staple lines, should be recommended to patients suffering from severe heterogeneous emphysema.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.