ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Histopathological features of chest wall masses: a systematic review.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chest wall masses can be caused by trauma, infections, inflammation, or cancer. These tumors can be benign or malignant and originate from different structures of the chest wall. This systematic review aimed to investigate the histopathological characteristics of chest wall masses. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for case series that reported the histopathological features of chest wall masses, without any restrictions on the date. The risk of bias was assessed using the JBI critical appraisal tools. Nine studies were included in the final review. Studies included a total of 1,279 patients with chest wall masses, with diverse age ranges. Biopsy methods such as fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB), cutting needle biopsy, and surgical resection biopsy were used to evaluate the pathology of the masses. The rate of malignancy in chest wall masses varied depending on the biopsy method used, ranging from 27.12% in needle biopsy to 47.16% in surgical resection biopsy. The overall rate of malignancy in chest wall tumors was 31.27%. About one-third of the chest wall masses are malignant, emphasizing the importance of accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment selection. Choosing the proper biopsy method is crucial for achieving successful outcomes and reducing mortality rates. Further research with larger sample sizes and improved reporting is needed to enhance our understanding of chest wall tumor pathology and improve patient outcomes.
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.