ArticleJournal of trauma and injury2024
Radiologic assessment of the optimal point for tube thoracostomy using the sternum as a landmark: a computed tomography-based analysis.
Article in Journal of trauma and injury, 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.
- Determination of the Optimal Landmark for Tube Thoracostomy in Trauma Patients: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed at developing a novel tube thoracostomy technique using the sternum, a fixed anatomical structure, as an indicator to reduce the possibility of incorrect chest tube positioning and complications in patients with chest trauma. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 184 patients with chest trauma who were aged ≥18 years, visited a single regional trauma center in Korea between April and June 2022, and underwent chest computed tomography (CT) with their arms down. The conventional gold standard, 5th intercostal space (ICS) method, was compared to the lower 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 of the sternum method by analyzing CT images. Results: When virtual tube thoracostomy routes were drawn at the mid-axillary line at the 5th ICS level, 150 patients (81.5%) on the right side and 179 patients (97.3%) on the left did not pass the diaphragm. However, at the lower 1/2 of the sternum level, 171 patients (92.9%, P<0.001) on the right and 182 patients (98.9%, P= 0.250) on the left did not pass the diaphragm. At the 5th ICS level, 129 patients (70.1%) on the right and 156 patients (84.8%) on the left were located in the safety zone and did not pass the diaphragm. Alternatively, at the lower 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 of the sternum level, 139 (75.5%, P=0.185), 49 (26.6%, P<0.001), and 10 (5.4%, P<0.001), respectively, on the right, and 146 (79.3%, P=0.041), 69 (37.5%, P<0.001), and 16 (8.7%, P<0.001) on the left were located in the safety zone and did not pass the diaphragm. Compared to the conventional 5th ICS method, the sternum 1/2 method had a safety zone prediction sensitivity of 90.0% to 90.7%, and 97.3% to 100% sensitivity for not passing the diaphragm. Conclusions: Using the sternum length as a tube thoracostomy indicator might be feasible.
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.