ArticleEuropean clinical respiratory journal2025
Indwelling peritoneal and pleural catheters in the management of malignant and non-malignant ascites and pleural effusion: experiences from a Danish tertiary center.
Article in European clinical respiratory journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Recurrent pleural effusions and ascites significantly impair quality of life, particularly in patients with advanced malignant and non-malignant disease. Traditional management often relies on repeated hospital-based procedures, which provide temporary symptom relief but place a considerable burden on patients and healthcare systems. This retrospective cohort study evaluates the safety, effectiveness, and clinical outcomes of indwelling pleural and peritoneal catheters (IPCs and IPeCs) in 63 patients treated at Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle between October 2019 and October 2024. A total of 30 patients received IPCs and 33 received IPeCs. Most had malignant effusions or ascites, but a notable proportion had non-malignant causes such as heart failure, liver cirrhosis, or renal disease. Following catheter placement, median survival was 45 days for IPC patients and 34 days for IPeC patients. Infection rates were low: 17% of IPC patients developed superficial skin infections, all treated successfully with oral antibiotics, and 6% of IPeC patients developed peritonitis, with one case potentially unrelated to the catheter. Importantly, 70% of IPC and 76% of IPeC patients had no hospital visits due to catheter-related complications, supporting the safety and outpatient feasibility of these devices. Additionally, a substantial proportion of patients-23% (IPC) and 30% (IPeC) - were able to remain in their own homes, potentially with support from home care services, rather than requiring institutionalization. These findings underline the benefit of early catheter placement in supporting patient autonomy and symptom control. Our results confirm that IPCs and IPeCs are safe and effective for managing both malignant and non-malignant effusions, with low complication rates and high patient benefit. Our findings support broader use of these catheters in palliative care. Earlier consideration of catheter placement may further improve outcomes and quality of life.
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.