Observational studyBMC research notes2024
Single-centre observational study of the safety and efficacy of thoracoscopy under local anaesthesia for the management of thoracic infections.
Observational study in BMC research notes, 2024. 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.
- First-line medical thoracoscopy for pleural infection: the SPIRIT randomised controlled feasibility trial.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Trial
- Italian multicentre study on the management of pLeural infection and empyema: IMPLE study.Respiratory research · 2025Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThoracoscopy under local anaesthesia is widely performed to diagnose malignancies and infectious diseases. However, few reports have described the use of this procedure for diagnosing and treating intrathoracic infections. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of thoracoscopy under local anaesthesia for the management of intrathoracic infections.
resultsData from patients who underwent thoracoscopy procedures performed by chest physicians under local anaesthesia at our hospital between January 2018 and December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. We analysed their demographic factors, reasons for the examinations, diseases targeted, examination lengths, anaesthetic methods used, diagnostic and treatment success rates, as well as any adverse events. Thirty patients were included. Of these, 12 (40%) had thoracoscopies to diagnose infections, and 18 (60%) had them to treat pyothorax. In terms of diagnosing pleurisy, the causative microorganism of origin was identified via thoracoscopy in only three of 12 (25.0%) patients. For diagnosing pyothorax, the causative microorganism was identified in 7 of 18 (38.9%) patients. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative microorganism identified. The treatment success rates were very high, ranging between 94.4 and 100%, whereas the identification rate of the causative microorganisms behind infections was low, ranging between 25.0 and 38.9%. The most frequent adverse events included perioperative hypoxaemia and pain. There were two (6.7%) serious adverse events of grade ≥ 3, but none resulted in death.
conclusionsThe efficacy of managing intrathoracic infections through thoracoscopy under local anaesthesia is commendable. Nonetheless, the diagnostic accuracy of the procedure, regarding the precise identification of the causative microorganisms responsible for intrathoracic infections, persists at a notably low level, presenting a substantial clinical hurdle.
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.