ReviewCureus2024
Comparison of Intercostal and Subxiphoid Left Pleural Drain After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Advantages of negative-pressure suction device compared to traditional chest closed drainage in the management of patients after mediastinal mass resection.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), a prevalent surgery for coronary artery disease, often involves left internal mammary artery harvesting, necessitating left pleural drain insertion. This can lead to pain, discomfort, and respiratory issues. This analysis compares outcomes between subxiphoid and intercostal left pleural drain insertion. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this systematic review and meta-analysis involved searches in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, Google Scholar, and Clinical Trial Registry. Studies were selected based on primary outcomes (postoperative ventilator support duration and pain score) and secondary outcomes (percentage predicted vital capacity (VC), forced VC (FVC), and partial pressure of oxygen (PO2) in arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis). Statistical analysis used a random effect model, pooled risk ratio, and I2 heterogeneity. Nine studies (seven randomized and two nonrandomized) with 412 patients met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis indicated reduced ventilation time and postoperative pain with the subxiphoid drain compared to the intercostal drain. Spirometry parameters showed improved VC, FVC, and PO2 in ABG analysis. This meta-analysis suggests that subxiphoid pleural drain insertion in CABG patients is associated with shorter ventilation times, lower pain scores, and improved pulmonary function compared to intercostal drain placement.
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.