Observational studyRespiration; international review of thoracic diseases2025
Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Different Types of One-Way Valves in Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction in Patients with Severe Lung Emphysema.
Observational study in Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases, 2025. 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.
- Observational
- Limited Benefit of Additional ChartisInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) with valves is an effective intervention in patients with severe lung emphysema. Two types of valves are established in clinical practice: Zephyr endobronchial valves (EBVs) and Spiration Valve System (SVS). We aimed to compare outcomes and the safety associated with these two types of one-way valves.
methodsData were collected from three German lung emphysema centers as part of a prospective observational study focusing on lung volume reduction. Two groups were formed based on valve types. In both groups, lung function (FEV1, RV, diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, pCO2), 6-min walking distance (6MWD), quality of life (SGRQ, mMRC, CAT), and complication rate were recorded at baseline and at follow-up 3 to 6 months later.
resultsA total of 54 patients were treated with SVS valves and 99 patients with EBV. There were no significant differences between both groups at baseline. Notably, both types of valves exhibited significant enhancements in lung function and quality of life. Interestingly, there were no significant differences in the median change of all measured parameters for both groups, suggesting comparable improvements in EBV and SVS. Pneumothorax was the most common complication for both valve types. The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between groups.
conclusionOur study suggests that both types of valves are safe and effective in the treatment of severe lung emphysema. We recommend choosing the valve type based on individual bronchial anatomy. However, further randomized studies are needed to confirm our results.
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.