ArticleHeliyon2023
A randomized controlled trial: Comparison of 14 and 24 French thoracic drainage after minimally invasive lobectomy - MZ 14-24 study.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The evolution of chest tube management following lung cancer surgery: many options, scarce evidence.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
- Intrapleural injection of bupivacaine liposome for pain management after thoracoscopic surgery.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Drainology: Leveraging research in chest-drain management to enhance recovery after cardiothoracic surgery.JTCVS techniques · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal placement of a chest drain after video-assisted minimally invasive lobectomy should facilitate the aspiration of air and drainage of fluid. Typically, a conventional 24Ch polyvinyl chloride chest drain is used for this purpose. However, there is currently no scientific literature available on the impact of drain diameter on postoperative outcomes following anatomical lung resection. Methods: This is a prospective, randomized, phase-1 trial that will include 40 patients, which will be randomly assigned into two groups. Group 1 will receive a 24 French chest drain according to current standards, while group 2 will receive a 14 French drain. Primary endpoint of the trial is the incidence of postoperative drainage-related complications, such as obstruction, dislocation, pleural effusion, and reintervention. Secondary endpoints are postoperative pain, chest drainage duration, incidence of complications, and hospital length of stay. The study aims to determine the number of subjects needed to achieve a sufficient test power of 0.8 for a non-inferiority study. Discussion: Thoracic surgery is becoming more and more minimally invasive. One of the remaining unresolved problems is postoperative pain, with the intercostal drain being one of the main contributing factors. Previous data from other studies suggest that the use of small-bore drains can reduce pain and speed up recovery without an increase in drain-related complications. However, no studies have been conducted on patients undergoing anatomic lung resections to date. The initial step in transitioning from larger to smaller drains is to establish the safety of this approach, which is the primary objective of this trial.Trial registration: The study has been registered in the German Clinical Trials Register.Registration number: DRKS00029982.URL: https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00029982.
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.