Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32395535›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2020

The diagnostic yield of closed needle pleural biopsy in exudative pleural effusion: a retrospective 10-year study.

Tianli Zhang, Bing Wan, Li Wang, Chuling Li, Yangyang Xu, Xiangdong Wang, Hongbing Liu, Yong Song, Dang Lin, Ping Zhan and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Pulmonary Synovial Sarcoma: An Unpleasant Surprise.European journal of case reports in internal medicine · 2021
    Article
  15. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Tianli ZhangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Bing WanDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Li WangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Chuling LiDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Jinling Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Yangyang XuDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Jinling Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Xiangdong WangDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing Chest Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Hongbing LiuDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Yong SongDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Dang LinDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou 215001, China.
Ping ZhanDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Tangfeng LvDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Southeast University, Nanjing 210002, China.
Nanjing Medical University · CNNanjing General Hospital of Nanjing Military Command · CNSoutheast University · CNNanjing Chest Hospital · CNNanjing Jiangning Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPleural effusion is a common presentation in clinical practice. About 40% of exudative pleural effusion is unable to be diagnosed through thoracentesis, and closed pleural biopsy (CPB) is needed. This study was designed to investigate the diagnostic yield of CPB in exudative pleural effusion.

methodsThis was a retrospective 10-year study of patients with unexplained exudative pleural effusion who underwent CPB in two centers. Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) was diagnosed when there was histopathological evidence of pleural tissue, pulmonary tissue, or pleural fluid. Tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) was confirmed when granuloma or coagulative necrosis was observed in pleural tissue, Ziehl-Neelsen acid-fast staining was positive, or adenosine deaminase (ADA) in pleural effusion was higher than 35IU with clinical symptoms of TB orγ-interferon increased with symptoms of TB.

resultsA total of 644 patients were enrolled, of which 479 were specifically diagnosed (217 patients with TPE and 262 patients with MPE). The sensitivity of CPB in the diagnosis of MPE was 51.5%. Among the pathological types of MPE, lung adenocarcinoma accounted for 77.9% (204/262) of cases, making up the largest proportion. The sensitivity of CPB for diagnosing TPE was 68.7%.

conclusionsCPB has a relatively high sensitivity in the diagnosis of exudative pleural fluid, especially in relation to tuberculous lesions. CPB could provide an alternative technique in clinical practice, especially for basic hospital units without thoracoscopy.

Indexed as

Closed pleural biopsy (CPB)malignant pleural effusion (MPE)sensitivitytuberculous pleural effusion (TPE)

Identifiers

PMID32395535
PMCPMC7210145
OpenAlexW3013382081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.