SynthesisJornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia2024
Talc slurry versus thoracoscopic talc insufflation for malignant pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chemical pleurodesis as a therapeutic option in non-traumatic chylothorax: a scoping review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Contemporary Pleural Drainage in Adult Practice: Image-Guided Techniques, Procedural Safety, Training Standards, and Malignant Pleural Effusion Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Indwelling pleural catheter efficacy and safety in malignant vs. non-malignant pleural effusions: a prospective study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of Talc Slurry Pleurodesis in the Treatment of Patients with Malignant Pleural Effusion and Low Karnofsky Performance Status Scores.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Evolving Role of Chemotherapy in the Management of Pleural Malignancies: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Cancers · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTalc pleurodesis is a widely used treatment option for malignant pleural effusion (MPE). However, the optimal form of administration remains controversial. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of talc slurry (TS) in comparison with thoracoscopic talc insufflation/poudrage (TTI) for MPE treatment.
methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that compared TS with TTI in patients with MPE. We used a random-effects model with a 95% CI to pool the data. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics.
resultsWe included eight studies involving 1,163 patients, 584 of whom (50.21%) underwent TS. Pleurodesis failure rates were similar between the procedures (OR = 1.07; 95% CI: 0.56-2.06; p = 0.83; I2 = 62%); and 68% of patients (95% CI: 0.31-1.47; p = 0.33; I2 = 58%) had postoperative complications, which were lower in patients in the TS group than in the TTI group. In a subgroup analysis considering only randomized clinical trials, the failure rate was significantly lower in the TS treatment group (OR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42-0.90; p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). Similarly, dyspnea was less common in the TS group (OR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.41-1.34; p = 0.32; I2 = 55%). Adverse effects were reported in 86 patients, and no significant difference was seen between the TS and TTI groups: empyema (OR = 1.43; 95% CI: 0.36-5.64; p = 0.86; I2 = 0%), pain (OR = 1.22 (95% CI: 0.67-2.21; p = 0.51; I2 = 38%), and pneumonia (OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 0.30-4.46; p = 0.86; I2 = 27%).
conclusionsOur findings suggest that TS is an effective treatment for MPE, with no significant increase in adverse events. Results suggest equivalent efficacy and safety for both procedures.
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.