ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Short-term prognosis, mid- and long-term clinical follow-up of bronchoscopic intervention therapy combined with bronchial artery embolization on massive hemoptysis.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To explore the short-term prognosis, mid- and long-term clinical follow-up of bronchoscopic intervention therapy (BIT) combined with bronchial artery embolization (BAE) in the treatment of massive hemoptysis. Methods: Patients with massive hemoptysis who received BAE (BAE group) or BAE combined with BIT (BAE & BIT group) based on standard clinical treatment were included retrospectively, during June 2022 and March 2023. The short-term prognosis assessed by the therapeutic response, hemoptysis recurrence rates at 1-month post-surgery, and postoperative complications were compared. Mid- and long-term clinical follow-up data were collected. Results: Data were collected from 136 patients. There were 68 patients (aged 21-60 years, 31 males) received BAE & BIT, and 68 patients (aged 20-59 years, 36 males) received BAE were matched. After surgery, the immediate response rate and total response rate in BIT & BAE group were significantly higher than those in BAE group, while comparable hemoptysis recurrence rates at 1-month post-surgery. Patients in BIT & BAE group had significantly lower rates of postoperative complications, including obstructive pneumonia lung consolidation, and atelectasis, compared to those in BAEgroup. No death in the BIT & BAE group, while the BAE group experienced 3 intraoperative deaths and 4 cases requiring conversion to surgical intervention. No recurrence was observed during the mid-term and long-term follow-up. Conclusion: Compared to BAE alone, BIT combined with BAT may offer better short-term prognosis, including higher response rate, lower rates of postoperative complications and mortality, in the management of massive hemoptysis, with a good mid- and long-term therapeutic effects.
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.