Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30174919›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2018

Indwelling pleural catheters: complications and management strategies.

Michel Chalhoub, Amina Saqib, Michael Castellano

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A patient-centred approach to malignant pleural effusion.European clinical respiratory journal · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Challenges of the Regional Anesthetic Techniques in Intensive Care Units - A Narrative Review.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Modern day management of a unilateral pleural effusion.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michel ChalhoubDepartment of Medicine, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, NY, USA.
Amina SaqibDepartment of Medicine, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, NY, USA.
Michael CastellanoDepartment of Medicine, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, NY, USA.
Staten Island University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) are increasingly being used for patients with recurrent malignant pleural effusions. They are simple to place and can be done on an outpatient basis under local anesthesia. IPCs uniformly relieve dyspnea and improve quality of life of patients with malignant pleural effusions. In some patients with recurrent non-malignant pleural effusions, IPCs proved to be effective as well. With increasing use of IPCs, physicians and patients are faced with complications related to the presence of an indwelling catheter for extended periods of time. The purpose of this review is to describe the various complications of IPCs and to present the available data on how to best treat and potentially prevent these complications.

Indexed as

complicationsIndwelling pleural catheters (IPCs)malignant pleural effusionsrecurrent pleural effusions (RPEs)

Identifiers

PMID30174919
PMCPMC6105989
OpenAlexW2806598366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.