ArticleLung2021
A Modified Calculation Improves the Accuracy of Predicted Postoperative Lung Function Values in Lung Cancer Patients.
Article in Lung, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Superiority of single-photon emission computed tomography for predicting postoperative lung function after anatomical lung resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- LUNG Year in Review: 2021.Lung · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePreoperative pulmonary function testing is mandatory for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgery. The predicted postoperative FEV1 (ppoFEV1) is used for further risk stratification. We compared the ppoFEV1 with the postoperative FEV1 (postFEV1) in order to improve the calculation of the ppoFEV1.
methods87 patients voluntarily received an FEV1 assessment 1 year after surgery. ppoFEV1 was calculated according to the Brunelli calculation. Baseline characteristics and surgical procedure were compared in a uni- and multivariate analysis between different accuracy levels of the ppoFEV1. Parameters which remained significant in the multinominal regression analysis were evaluated for a modification of the ppoFEV1 calculation.
resultsIndependent factors for a more inaccurate ppoFEV1 were preoperative active smoking (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, confidence interval (CI) 3.6-6.41; p = 0.01), packyears (OR 4.1, CI 3.6-6.41; p = 0.008), younger age (OR 1.1, CI 1.01-1.12; p = 0.03), and patients undergoing pneumectomy (OR 5.55, CI 1.35-23.6; p = 0.01). For the customized ppoFEV1 we excluded pneumonectomies. For patients < 60 years, an additional lung segment was added to the calculation. ppoFEV1 = preFEV1 × [Formula: see text]. For actively smoking patients with more than 30 packyears we subtracted one lung segment from the calculation ppoFEV1 = PreFEV1 × [Formula: see text].
conclusionWe were able to enhance the predictability of the ppoFEV1 with modifications. The modified ppoFEV1 (1.828 l ± 0.479 l) closely approximates the postFEV1 of 1.823 l ± 0.476 l, (0.27%) while the original ppoFEV1 calculation is at 1.78 l ± 0.53 (2.19%). However, if patients require pneumectomy, more complex techniques to determine the ppoFEV1 should be included to stratify risk.
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.