ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2020
Safety of the anterior approach versus the lateral approach for chest tube insertion by residents treating spontaneous pneumothorax: a propensity score weighted analysis.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 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.
- SPLF/SMFU/SRLF/SFAR/SFCTCV Guidelines for the management of patients with primary spontaneous pneumothorax.Annals of intensive care · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the risk of chest tube malposition, the most common complication during chest tube insertion, with the anterior or lateral approach for thoracostomy performed for patients with spontaneous pneumothorax by junior and senior residents.
methodsWe retrospectively included patients aged ≥ 20 years who exhibited primary or secondary spontaneous pneumothorax without pleural adhesion and underwent chest tube drainage performed by junior or senior residents at tertiary care hospital. The study exposure involved insertion of the chest tube in the midclavicular line (anterior approach) or the anterior or midaxillary line (lateral approach). The primary outcome was the number of chest tube malpositions. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to adjust for baseline confounders.
resultsWe identified 34 and 219 patients who underwent thoracostomy using the midclavicular and lateral approaches, respectively. The number of chest tube malpositions was 4 (11.8%) in the anterior approach and 34 (15.5%) in the lateral approach. The inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis revealed that the estimated odds ratio for chest tube malposition in the anterior approach group versus the lateral approach group was 0.61 (95% confidence interval, 0.17-2.11). The duration of chest tube drainage and the number of operations for persistent air leaks were not significantly different between the groups.
conclusionsThe current study revealed that the risk of chest tube malposition in thoracostomies with the midclavicular approach was not different from that with the lateral approach.
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.