Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29157739›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2018

Office-Based Spirometry: A New Model of Care in Preoperative Assessment for Low-Risk Lung Resections.

Jessica L Hudson, Jennifer M Bell, Traves D Crabtree, Daniel Kreisel, G Alexander Patterson, Bryan F Meyers, Varun Puri

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. The role of handheld spirometry in lung surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jessica L HudsonDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Jennifer M BellDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Traves D CrabtreeDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Daniel KreiselDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
G Alexander PattersonDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Bryan F MeyersDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Varun PuriDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. Electronic address: puriv@wudosis.wustl.edu.
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

SURGICAL ONCOLOGY TRAINING GRANTT32CA009621 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN, William E. Gillanders · 1988 to 2026
$12.9M
PREDICTIVE MODELING IN LUNG CANCERK07CA178120 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI PURI, VARUN · 2013 to 2017
$789k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA178120NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009621
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFormal pulmonary function testing with laboratory spirometry (LS) is the standard of care for risk stratification before lung resection. LS and handheld office spirometry (OS) are clinically comparable for forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity. We investigated the safety of preoperative risk stratification based solely on OS.

methodsPatients at low-risk for cardiopulmonary complications were enrolled in a single-center prospective study and underwent preoperative OS. Formal LS was not performed when forced expiratory volume in 1 second was more than 60% by OS. Propensity score matching was used to compare patients in the OS group to low-risk institutional database patients (2008 to 2015) who underwent LS and lung resection. Standardized mean differences determined model covariate balance. The McNemar test and log-rank test were performed, respectively, for categorical and continuous paired outcome data.

resultsThere were 66 prospectively enrolled patients who received OS and underwent pulmonary resection, and 1,290 patients received preoperative LS, resulting in 52 propensity score-matched pairs (83%). There were no deaths and two 30-day readmissions per group. The major morbidity risk was similar in each group (7.7%). All analyses of discordant pair morbidity had p exceeding 0.56. There was no association between length of stay and exposure to OS vs LS (p = 0.31). The estimated annual institutional cost savings from performing OS only and avoiding LS was $38,000.

conclusionsLow-risk patients undergoing lung resection can be adequately and safely assessed using OS without formal LS, with significant cost savings. With upcoming bundled care reimbursement paradigms, such safe and effective strategies are likely to be more widely used.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalOffice VisitsPneumonectomySpirometryAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID29157739
PMCPMC5901685
OpenAlexW2770080726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.