Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30497433›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2018

Systematic review of quality of life following pleurectomy decortication and extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Rebecca M Schwartz, Wil Lieberman-Cribbin, Andrea Wolf, Raja M Flores, Emanuela Taioli

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Update on biology and management of mesothelioma.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Malignant pleural mesothelioma: between pragmatism and hope.Annals of translational medicine · 2020
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca M SchwartzDepartment of Occupational Medicine, Epidemiology and Prevention, Northwell Health Physician Partners, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Great Neck, NY, USA.
Wil Lieberman-CribbinInstitute for Translational Epidemiology and Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Andrea WolfDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Raja M FloresDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Emanuela TaioliInstitute for Translational Epidemiology and Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. emanuela.taioli@mountsinai.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6930-1635
Mount Sinai Health System · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USNorthwell Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew studies have focused on quality of life (QoL) after treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). There are still questions as to which surgical procedure, extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or pleurectomy decortication (P/D) is most effective and results in better survival outcomes, involves fewer complications, and results in better QoL. Here we performed a literature review on MPM patients to assess and compare QoL changes after P/D and EPP.

methodsResearch articles concerning QoL after mesothelioma surgery were identified through May 2018 in Medline. For inclusion, studies were 1) cohort or randomized controlled trials (RCT) design, 2) included standardized QoL instruments, 3) reported QoL measurement after surgery, 4) described the type of surgery performed (EPP or P/D), 5) were written in English. Measures of lung function (FEV1, FVC) and measures from the EORTC-C30 were compared 6 months following surgery with preoperative values.

resultsQoL data was extracted from 17 articles (14 datasets), encompassing 659 patients (102 EPP, 432 P/D); the available evidence was of low quality. While two studies directly compared QoL between the two surgical procedures, additional data was available from one arm of two RCTs, as the RCTs were not comparing EPP and P/D. The remaining data was reported from observational studies. While QoL was still compromised 6 months following surgery, from the limited and low quality data available it would appear that P/D patients had better QoL than EPP patients across all measures. Physical function, social function and global health were better at follow-up for P/D than for EPP, while other indicators such as pain and cough were similar. Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) were reported in one study only, and were higher at follow-up for P/D compared to EPP.

conclusionsAlthough the existing evidence is limited and of low quality, it suggests that P/D patients have better QoL than EPP patients following surgery. QoL outcomes should be factored into the choice of surgical procedure for MPM patients, and the possible effects on lung function and QoL should be discussed with patients when presenting surgical treatment options.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMesotheliomaMesothelioma, MalignantPleural NeoplasmsPneumonectomyTreatment OutcomeCancerFunctional measuresOutcomesSurgical approach

Identifiers

PMID30497433
PMCPMC6267825
OpenAlexW2902613604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.