Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34527361›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2021

Persistent air leak management in critically ill patients.

Jonathan S Kurman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Air leaks in COVID-19.World journal of virology · 2022
    Review
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

1 author.

Jonathan S KurmanDivision of Pulmonary & Critical Care, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Persistent air leak (PAL) is a challenging clinical entity, particularly in the setting of critical illness. It is a significant cause of morbidity, health care expenditure, and resource utilization. Data on its prevalence in the critically ill patient population are limited. Unique patient factors often necessitate an individualized approach. Guidelines on this subject are antiquated and do not specially address patients on mechanical ventilation. Critically ill patients may not be able to tolerate surgical intervention. Treatment in this population relies upon lung protective ventilation, various anecdotal modalities, chemical pleurodesis, autologous blood patching, and bronchoscopic insertion of endobronchial valves. Ventilation strategies center on rapid weaning and reduction of airway pressures. Anecdotal methods include implantable devices and chemical agents. Data on these modalities are limited to case reports. None have United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. The Spiration Valve System is FDA approved as a Humanitarian Device Exemption. Data on endobronchial valves are based on large case series, and only one small case series has focused exclusively on critically ill patients. The majority of valves in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients are used for non-FDA approved indications. Updated guidelines are desperately needed to ensure a standardized approach to this common clinical situation.

Indexed as

airway valvesbronchoscopyEndobronchial valvespersistent air leak (PAL)pneumothorax

Identifiers

PMID34527361
PMCPMC8411173

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.