ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2020
Clinical long-term outcome of non-specific pleuritis (NSP) after surgical or medical thoracoscopy.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term follow-up results of patients diagnosed with nonspecific pleuritis by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery biopsy.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- The usefulness of full-thickness biopsy during semi-rigid pleuroscopy for differentiating between malignant pleural mesothelioma and non-specific pleurisy.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- The Evolving Role of Medical Thoracoscopy for the Management of Malignant Pleural Effusion.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Non-Specific Pleuritis After Medical Thoracoscopy: The Portrait of an Open Issue and Practical Hints for Its Management.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Investigation and outcomes in patients with nonspecific pleuritis: results from the International Collaborative Effusion database.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Inflammation of the Pleural Cavity: A Review on Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Implications in Tumor Pathophysiology.Cancers · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThoracoscopy, either "medical" or "surgical", is the gold standard to reveal the cause of pleural effusion by taking large biopsies. However, in some cases, the histology of pleural biopsies is inconclusive for a specific cause, describing a variable process of inflammation, encompassing for non-specific pleuritis (NSP). Questions are raised whether the surgical (or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, VATS) is doing better than the medical thoracoscopy (MT or pleuroscopy), but no direct comparison between the two techniques exist in the current bibliography. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare these two techniques to find whether there is any difference in the false negative cases of NSP.
methodsWe included in our study 295 patients with NSP, 179 patients who underwent VATS comparing to 116 patients who underwent MT for pleural effusion of initially undetermined cause, having a follow-up of at least one year. Analysis of patients' files, history, clinical examinations, further tests, and follow-up were recorded.
resultsThe mean age of our patients was 58.5±19.1 and M/F gender was 216/79; no difference was observed between the two groups. The mean follow-up period was 47.3±20.7 months. After VATS, only one patient (0.55%) was finally diagnosed with pleural malignancy (false negative) while after MT 2 patients (1.7%). Negative predictive value for pleura-related malignancy for VATS was 0.994 and for MT 0.982.
conclusionsIn patients with histological diagnosis of NSP both VATS and MT showed similar and excellent results of false negative cases and negative predictive value in excluding malignant pleural disease.
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.