Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39960267›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in pulmonary medicine2025

Pleural infection: controversies on the therapeutic strategies.

Ken K P Chan, Estee P M Lau, Y C Gary Lee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in pulmonary medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ken K P ChanDepartment of Medicine & Therapeutics.
Estee P M LauPleural Medicine Unit, Institute for Respiratory Health, University of Western Australia.
Y C Gary LeePleural Medicine Unit, Institute for Respiratory Health, University of Western Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewManagement of pleural infection remains heterogeneous worldwide. This review highlights current controversies in therapeutic strategies for pleural infection, focusing particularly on recent studies and their implications. RECENT

findingsThe introduction of intrapleural therapy combining alteplase [a tissue plasminogen activator (tPA)] and deoxyribonuclease (DNase) has revolutionized treatment practices, though the optimal delivery and dosing regimen is an area of active investigation. Variations to simplify administration protocols and/or to lower the required drug doses have been published. Most were exploratory studies, but the variations showed maintained therapeutic efficacy.Whether intrapleural alteplase/DNase or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is superior is a topic of debate. Retrospective comparative analyses between the two revealed no clear benefits on all-cause mortality from either approach. Pilot randomized trials have been published and further full-scale, head-to-head trials are underway. SUMMARY: Effective management of pleural infection involves adequate pleural drainage and appropriate antibiotic use. This review outlines the current evidence (and its limitations) and highlights knowledge gaps in optimizing the therapeutic strategies.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDeoxyribonucleasesFibrinolytic AgentsPleural DiseasesTissue Plasminogen ActivatorDrainageHumansThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedAnti-Bacterial AgentsDeoxyribonucleasesFibrinolytic AgentsTissue Plasminogen Activator

Identifiers

PMID39960267
PMCPMC11957435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.