ArticleSurgery in practice and science2025
Comparing outcomes of one-way Heimlich valve with conventional chest tube drainage for primary spontaneous pneumothorax: a randomized clinical trial.
Article in Surgery in practice and science, 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
Background: Primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP) is the accumulation of air in the pleural space without underlying lung disease. Standard management often involves chest tube insertion connected to an underwater seal drainage system (bottle), but alternatives like the Heimlich one-way valve exist. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of using a Heimlich valve versus standard chest tube drainage for PSP. Methods: This was a single-center, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled trial conducted at Shahid Madani Hospital, Karaj, Iran, from March 2023 to March 2024. Forty patients aged 18-40 years with symptomatic PSP (>15% collapse) were randomized (1:1 ratio) using block randomization. The intervention group received a 28 Fr chest tube connected to a Heimlich valve. The control group received a 28 Fr chest tube attached to an underwater sealed bottle. Primary outcomes included length of hospital stay, time to return to normal activities other outcomes included pain scores (Visual Analog Scale - VAS), dyspnea score (0-10), ease of getting out of bed (0-10), need for ketorolac analgesia, treatment failure (requiring VATS within 7 days), 30-day rehospitalization, and complications. Results: Forty patients (mean age 31.1±7.0 years; 80% male) were randomized to separate groups (20 per group). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The mean time to return to normal activities was significantly shorter in the Heimlich group (7.1±5.4 days vs. 10.2±8.0 days, P=0.014). Mean length of hospital stay was 5.6±3.0 days (Heimlich) vs. 7.3±4.6 days (Bottle), (P=0.081). Pain scores were significantly lower in the Heimlich group on days 1-4 (P<0.01). Ketorolac use (frequency and total dose) was significantly lower in the Heimlich group (P<0.001). Ease of getting out of bed was significantly greater in the Heimlich group throughout the assessment period. Pneumothorax resolution trended faster in the Heimlich group (P=0.077 on day 4). Dyspnea trended lower in the Heimlich group on day 4 (P=0.078). Treatment failure (requiring VATS) occurred in 1 (5%) of the Heimlich patients versus 3 (15%) of the Bottle patients (P = 0.29). Rehospitalization occurred in one patient per group (5%, P = 1.00). Conclusion: In patients with PSP, management with a Heimlich valve resulted in a significantly faster return to normal activities, lower pain scores, reduced analgesic requirements, and greater ease of mobilization than standard chest tube drainage. While not statistically significant, trends suggested faster pneumothorax resolution and potentially shorter hospital stays. The Heimlich valve appears to be a safe and effective alternative, offering potential patient comfort and recovery benefits. Trial registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT): IRCT20230208057359N1.
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.