Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38617774›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2024

Indwelling pleural catheter infection and colonisation: a clinical practice review.

Dheeraj K Sethi, Mark A Webber, Eleanor K Mishra

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. What is new in pleural infections?Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Journal of thoracic disease · 2024
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dheeraj K SethiQuadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1349-7442
Mark A WebberQuadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9169-7592
Eleanor K MishraDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5903-3005
University of East Anglia · GBQuadram Institute · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) are used in the management of malignant pleural effusions, but they can become infected in 5.7% of cases. This review aims to provide a summary of the development of IPC infections and their microbiology, diagnosis and management. IPC infections can be deep, involving the pleural space, or superficial. The former are of greater clinical concern. Deep infection is associated with biofilm formation on the IPC surface and require longer courses of antibiotic treatment. Mortality from infections is low and it is common for patients to undergo pleurodesis following a deep infection. The diagnosis of pleural infections is based upon positive IPC pleural fluid cultures, changes in pleural fluid appearance and biochemistry, and signs or symptoms suggestive of infection. IPCs can also become colonised, where bacteria are grown from pleural fluid drained via an IPC but without evidence of infection. It is important to distinguish between infection and colonisation clinically, and though infections require antibiotic treatment, colonisation does not. It is unclear what proportion of IPCs become colonised. The most common causes of IPC infection and colonisation are

Indexed as

Indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs)infectionpleural disease

Identifiers

PMID38617774
PMCPMC11009600
OpenAlexW4393267567

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.