Observational studyJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2020
Needle aspiration for treating iatrogenic pneumothorax after cardiac electronic device implantation: a pilot study.
Observational study in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and efficacy of vacuum bottle plus catheter for drainage of iatrogenic pneumothorax.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2022Trial
- Intelligent Detection and Diagnosis of Power Failure Relying on BP Neural Network Algorithm.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Natural History and Treatment of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Associated Pneumothorax-A 10-Year Single-Centre Experience.CJC open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePneumothorax (PTX) following cardiac implantable electronic device procedures is traditionally treated with chest tube drainage (CTD). We hypothesized that, in a subset of patients, the less invasive needle aspiration (NA) may also be effective. We compared the strategy of primary NA with that of primary CTD in a single-center observational study.
methodsOf the 970 procedures with subclavian venous access between January 2016 and June 2018, 23 patients had PTX requiring intervention. Beginning with March 2017, the traditional primary CTD (9 cases) has been replaced by the "NA first" strategy (14 patients). Outcome measures were procedural success rate and duration of hospitalization evaluated both as time to event (log-rank test) and as a discrete variable (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test).
resultsNeedle aspiration was successful in 8/14 (57.1%) of the cases (95% CI 28.9-82.3%), whereas PTX resolved in all patients after CTD was 9/9 (100%, 95% CI 66.4-100.0%, p = 0.0481). Regarding length of hospital stay, intention to treat time to event analysis showed no difference between the two approaches (p = 0.73). Also, the median difference was not statistically significant (- 2.0 days, p = 0.17). In contrast, per protocol evaluation revealed reduced risk of prolonged hospitalization for NA patients (p = 0.0025) with a median difference of - 4.0 days (p = 0.0012). Failure of NA did not result in a meaningful delay in discharge timing as median difference was 1.5 days (p = 0.28).
conclusionsOur data suggest that in a number of patients iatrogenic PTX may be successfully treated with NA resulting in shorter hospitalization without the risk of meaningful discharge delay in unsuccessful cases.
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.