ArticlePleura and peritoneum2017
(F)utility of computed tomography of the chest in the presence of pleural effusion.
Article in Pleura and peritoneum, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Automated Analysis for Pleural Effusion Detection on Thoracic Ultrasound: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Chest Ultrasonography and Computed Tomography as Predictors of Malignant Pleural Effusion: A Prospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Hydropneumothorax With Bronchopleural Fistula Following the Activation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis: A Case Report.Cureus · 2023Article
- Characterizing and quantifying low-value diagnostic imaging internationally: a scoping review.BMC medical imaging · 2022Article
- Asymptomatic man with an incidental finding of a massive empyema.BMJ case reports · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPleural effusion is common and can cause significant morbidity. The chest X-ray is often the initial radiological test, but additional tests may be required to reduce uncertainty and to provide additional diagnostic information. However, additional exposure and unnecessary costs should be prevented. The objective of the study was to assess the clinical benefit of an additional chest computed tomography (CT) scan over plain chest X-ray alone in the management of patients with pleural effusion.
methodsRetrospective analysis in 94 consecutive patients with pleural effusion who underwent chest X-ray and CT scan over an 18-month period in a single institution. All chest X-ray and CT scan reports were compared and correlated with clinical parameters in order to assess their utility in the clinical management. No blinding was applied.
resultsIn 75 chest CT scan reports (80 %), information provided by the radiologist did not change clinical management when compared to plain chest X-ray alone and did not provide any additional information over chest X-ray. Only 2/49 (4 %) of the native chest CT scan reports provided clinically relevant information as compared to 17/45 (38 %) contrast-enhanced chest CT scan reports (p<0.001).
conclusionsIn this retrospective cohort of patients with pleural effusion, an additional chest CT scan was not useful in the majority of patients. However, if a chest CT scan is required, then a contrast-enhanced study after pleural aspiration should be performed. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these 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.