ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction of two-stage versus single-stage computed tomography guided localization and resection of pulmonary nodules.
Article 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 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.
- One-stage vs. two-stage thoracoscopic surgery for synchronous bilateral pulmonary nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Low-dose computed tomography (CT) has been increasingly utilized for lung cancer screening. Localization of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) is crucial for resection. Two-stage localization method involves dye injection by radiologists prior to the operation. The significant interval between localization and resection is associated with a higher risk of marker failure, psychological distress and procedural complications. Single-stage localization and resection procedure under general anesthesia poses unique challenges. The aim of the study is to compare the safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction between the two methods. Methods: This is a retrospective study comparing outcomes between two-stage and single-stage pre-operative localization of SPN. The primary study outcome was total operating time. Secondary outcomes included successful lesion localization, complication rate, 30-day readmission, mortality, patient satisfaction, and pain level. Results: A total of 26 and 56 patients were included for the single and two-stage group respectively. Total operative time was significantly longer in the single-stage arm (mean: 188 min) than that of the two-stage arm (mean: 172 min, P<0.001) due to the additional time needed for intra-operative localization. Mean satisfaction score was significantly higher in the single-stage group than that of the two-stage group (92 Conclusions: Single-stage localization and resection resulted in a minor increase in total operative time, higher patient satisfaction and less pain with comparable safety and efficacy to conventional two-stage approach.
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.