ArticleScientific reports2023
Feasibility and safety of uniportal thoracoscopy for chronic pulmonary aspergillosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Video-assisted thoracoscopic sublobar versus lobar resection for chronic pulmonary aspergillosis: a 15-year single-center cohort study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Surgical Treatment for Pulmonary Aspergillosis: A Thirty-Year Single-Center Experience and the Contemporary Role of Surgery.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2026Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgery plays a crucial role in the treatment of patients with chronic pulmonary aspergillosis (CPA). However, there is currently limited information available regarding the use of uniportal thoracoscopy (Uni-VATS) in CPA patients. To address this gap, we conducted a retrospective analysis of surgical procedures performed at a single center, aiming to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of Uni-VATS for patients with CPA. We collected basic information and surgical data from patients who underwent surgery for CPA at our hospital between January 2018 and June 2022. All patients received voriconazole antifungal medication for 3-6 months post-surgery and were monitored for a minimum of 6 months. A total of 110 patients, comprising 59 cases in the traditional open chest incision group and 51 cases in the Uni-VATS group, met the inclusion criteria. Among those who underwent surgery, 70% were male (77/110). The median age (IQR) of all enrolled patients was 55 (46-62) years. There were no statistically significant differences in general information, such as age, sex, comorbidities, BMI, FEV1, FVC, clinical symptoms, location of the disease, and duration of voriconazole antifungal medication, between the OS group and the Uni-VATS group (p > 0.05). The postoperative complication rates were 40.7% (24/59) for the traditional open chest incision group and 17.6% (9/51) for the Uni-VATS group. Through univariate analysis, we identified sex and operative approach as risk factors for postoperative complications. Multivariate logistic analysis confirmed that male and OS procedures were the independent risk factors for postoperative complications. There were statistically significant differences in operative time, intraoperative blood loss volume, postoperative drainage volume, pain scores, postoperative drainage tube removal time, postoperative hospital stay time between the OS group and the Uni-VATS group (p < 0.05). Uni-VATS is a feasible and safe surgical procedure for patients with CPA, and we recommend it as a preferred option for selected patients with CPA.
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.