Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37518084›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2023

Percutaneous catheter drainage versus percutaneous needle aspiration for liver abscess: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Jin-Wei Lin, Chung-Ting Chen, Ming-Shun Hsieh, I-Hsin Lee, David Hung-Tsang Yen, Hao-Min Cheng, Teh-Fu Hsu

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. World journal of hepatology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jin-Wei LinDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-5845-0547
Chung-Ting ChenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-4747-2710
Ming-Shun HsiehDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
I-Hsin LeeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
David Hung-Tsang YenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hao-Min ChengCenter for Evidence-based Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan robert.tfhsu@gmail.com hmcheng@vghtpe.gov.tw.
Teh-Fu HsuDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan robert.tfhsu@gmail.com hmcheng@vghtpe.gov.tw.
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) against percutaneous needle aspiration (PNA) for liver abscess.

designSystematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, Airiti Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from their inception up to 16 March 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared PCD to PNA for liver abscess were considered eligible, without restriction on language. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Primary outcome was treatment success rate. Depending on heterogeneity, either a fixed-effects model or a random-effects model was used to derive overall estimates. Review Manager V.5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Trial sequential analysis was performed using the Trial Sequential Analysis software. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

resultsTen trials totalling 1287 individuals were included. Pooled analysis revealed that PCD, when compared with PNA, enhanced treatment success rate (risk ratio 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25). Trial sequential analysis demonstrated this robust finding with required information size attained. For large abscesses, subgroup analysis favoured PCD (test of subgroup difference, p<0.001). In comparison to PNA, pooled analysis indicated a significant benefit of PCD on time to achieve clinical improvement or complete clinical relief (mean differences (MD) -2.53 days; 95% CI -3.54 to -1.52) in six studies with 1000 patients; time to achieve a 50% reduction in abscess size (MD -2.49 days; 95% CI -3.59 to -1.38) in five studies with 772 patients; and duration of intravenous antibiotic use (MD -4.04 days, 95% CI -5.99 to -2.10) in four studies with 763 patients. In-hospital mortality and complications were not different.

conclusionIn patients with liver abscess, ultrasound-guided PCD raises the treatment success rate by 136 in 1000 patients, improves clinical outcomes by 3 days and reduces the need for intravenous antibiotics by 4 days. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022316540.

Indexed as

DrainageLiver AbscessAnti-Bacterial AgentsBiopsy, NeedleCathetersHumansSuctionAnti-Bacterial Agentspublic healthsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37518084
PMCPMC10387661
OpenAlexW4385406101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.