ArticleBMC surgery2025
Integration of mobile CT and basal anesthesia for pain-free preoperative localization of small pulmonary nodules: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the application of mobile CT combined with basal anesthesia in preoperative painless localization of small pulmonary nodules and evaluate its safety and effectiveness.
methodsThe clinical data of patients who underwent precise localization of pulmonary nodules via mobile CT combined with basal anesthesia in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Nanjing Brain Hospital, Nanjing Medical University October 2024–February 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. The basic information and perioperative outcomes of the entire group were analyzed.
resultsA total of 100 patients, 33 males and 67 females aged 19–86 years, were included. The preoperative localization success rate for 100 patients with small pulmonary nodules was 100.0%, with an average localization time of 14.51 ± 4.01 min.The localization-related complications included 1 case of intrapulmonary hemorrhage, 1 case of pneumothorax, and 2 cases of localization needle displacement, with no complications such as hemoptysis or pleural reaction. The time interval from completion of localization to the start of surgery was 28.83 ± 3.55 min. All patients underwent successful single-port thoracoscopic resection of pulmonary nodules without conversion to open thoracotomy. The average operative time was 62.72 ± 41.50 min. The surgery-related complications included one case of intraoperative bleeding, which was promptly controlled via endoscopic hemostasis. The average postoperative chest tube retention time was 3.60 ± 1.30 days, and the average hospital stay was 6.12 ± 1.15 days. Postoperative pathological results confirmed that all the nodules had a margin distance greater than 2 cm from the resection edge. The 100 patients were divided into two groups: one group underwent mobile CT-guided localization under lidocaine local anesthesia, while the other group received mobile CT-guided localization under basal anesthesia. Analysis of postlocalization pain scores revealed that basal anesthesia achieved superior analgesic efficacy (P < 0.05).
conclusionThe combination of mobile CT with basal anesthesia enables painless and precise preoperative localization of pulmonary nodules, effectively reducing the incidence of localization-related complications, shortening surgical waiting times, and ensuring the safety and efficacy of preoperative localization in patients with pulmonary nodules. This approach further enhances patient comfort during the procedure and demonstrates certain clinical application value.
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.