Trial reportThoracic cancer2023
Evaluation of pain levels treated by the distal end of the hook-wire positioning needle: A randomized controlled study.
Trial report in Thoracic cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSevere pain can be expected among adult patients undergoing hook-wire CT-guided localization of pulmonary nodules. We compared varying pain degrees between two different treatment techniques.
methodsData from 100 patients who underwent hook-wire puncture localization under preoperative CT between May 2022 and October 2022 were prospectively reviewed. Using the random number table method, the patients were assigned to an observation and control group in a 1:1 ratio. In the observation group (n = 50), the external part of the hook-wire positioning needle was cut off; in the control group (n = 50), the external portion of the needle was bent. Static pain scores were measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) at 30 min, 1, and 2 h post localization for patients.
resultsNo significant differences were present between the two groups in terms of patient age, sex, nodule size, and nodule location. The observation group had lower VAS scores at 30 min (2.57 ± 1.38 vs. 3.51 ± 1.87 p = 0.005), 1 h (2.43 ± 1.14 vs. 3.33 ± 1.76 p = 0.003), and 2 h (2.41 ± 1.12 vs. 3.17 ± 1.74 p = 0.011) after localization. Moreover, the pain level did not gradually worsen in either group. Both groups had a 100% localization success rate. There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.431) in the localized complication incidences between the two groups.
conclusionsWe found both approaches for handling the hook-wire extending outside the chest to be safe and effective. However, cutting off the hook-wire extending outside the chest is associated with lesser pain. Moreover, pain severity does not worsen with time after localization.
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.