ArticleDer Anaesthesist2017
[Unusual complication following placement of an epidural catheter].
Article in Der Anaesthesist, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review of Facklamia Species Involvement in Human Infection and Urological Disease.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Facklamia hominis pyelonephritis in a pediatric patient: first case report and review of the literature.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2022Review
- Facklamia hominis bacteremia after transurethral resection of the prostate: a case report.BMC urology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report an unusual complication following placement of a thoracic epidural catheter in a patient that had undergone surgery for pulmonary metastases of a malignant melanoma. The intra- and postoperative course was initially without complications. At 2 days, there was a small, conspicuous swelling above the site of epidural puncture, which was neither reddened nor painful. No neurological deficits were observed, and the patient explained that he had been aware of the swelling for more than 6 months; thus, the epidural catheter was not deemed to be responsible. After catheter removal on day 4, an apparently purulent fluid drained from the puncture site. Although the patient had not reported this in the initial medical examination, he now explained that this cutaneous process had been squeezed out by his wife several times before. We initially obtained an exudate by means of ultrasound-guided puncture, and two epidermal cysts were detected on subsequent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The epidural catheter had been placed through one of these epidermal cysts. After reassessing the medical files, we found the earlier reports of two positron emission tomographies in which two epidermoid cysts were described at the level of thoracic vertebra 5/6 and 6/7. Facklamia hominis was detected in the pure culture. To avoid bacterial infection, we treated the patient for 7 days with antibiotics. The clinical course was without further pathological findings.
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.