ArticleBMJ case reports2020
Mesalamine-induced eosinophilic pleural effusion.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence, aetiology and clinical features of eosinophilic pleural effusion: a retrospective study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A 45-year-old woman with a medical history of ulcerative colitis (UC) presented with difficulty in breathing. The patient was diagnosed with UC a month prior to presentation and was started on mesalamine suppository. Chest x-ray (CXR) on presentation showed bilateral pleural effusion, which was confirmed on CT angiogram of the chest. Diagnostic and therapeutic thoracentesis was performed and 0.7 L of pleural fluid was removed from the left side. The pleural fluid analysis was consistent with exudative pleural effusion with eosinophilia. Symptomatic improvement was noted after thoracentesis. Mesalamine was stopped and repeat CXR was obtained on the follow-up visit, which showed no pleural effusion. The Naranjo score was calculated to be 7, indicating that the eosinophilic pleural effusion was most probably secondary to adverse reaction from mesalamine.
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.