Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30450294›Full record

ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2018

Extended pleurectomy decortication: the current role.

Rocco Bilancia, Marco Nardini, David A Waller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Rocco BilanciaDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Marco NardiniDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Catania, Catania, Italy.
David A WallerDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extended pleurectomy/decortication (EPD) has been formally defined but there remain technical areas of debate between practitioners. This is partly attributable to the relative rarity of this operation which is largely confined to a small number of specialist centres. Nevertheless, there is a widespread acceptance that extended pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) is a realistic and favourable alternative to extrapleural pneumonectomy. There may, however, remain a small number of clinical cases where this more extensive operation may be indicated. Preservation of the lung has widened the selection criteria for this form of radical mesothelioma surgery but there remain important factors to consider when offering extended P/D. In many patients with poorer prognostic factors the less radical operation of video assisted partial pleurectomy may be preferable. However, a randomized trial showed no survival benefit for this operation over simple talc pleurodesis. The future for P/D may also lie in the outcome of the MARS2 randomized controlled trial which will report in the next few years. Meanwhile there is a clinical and ethical dilemma when asked to perform this operation outside of the context of a clinical trial in the face of the lack of high grade evidence. The role of P/D is in one respect expanding but this may be short lived pending the findings of its assessment against non-surgical treatment.

Indexed as

Pleural mesotheliomapleurectomy/decortication (P/D)surgery

Identifiers

PMID30450294
PMCPMC6204414

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.