ArticleCureus2025
Computer Tomography-Guided Pulmonary Microcoil Insertion for the Localisation of Small Pulmonary Nodules at the Time of Pulmonary Resection.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- CT-guided Preoperative Localization of Impalpable Pulmonary Nodules: Comparison Between Two Devices.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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 Small and ground glass pulmonary nodules pose a surgical and diagnostic challenge, with an increase in identification expected with the roll-out of lung cancer screening in Australia. Accurate preoperative localisation of small pulmonary nodules can be a useful adjunct to lung resection in nodules that are not palpable. Various methods have been trialled including methylene blue dye injection and hook-wire placement; however, these are limited by dye diffusion, wire dislodgement, and patient discomfort. CT-guided insertion of a microcoil is a technique of localisation that provides a stable and visible marker on X-ray, improving intraoperative identification. This study reports an Australian institutional experience with this technique and evaluates its safety and efficacy. Methods A retrospective review of all patients undergoing CT-guided pulmonary microcoil localisation followed by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) was conducted at the Alfred Hospital, Melbourne. A case series of 19 patients from 2021 - 2025 was identified and data on technical success, complications, operative outcomes, and pathology were collected. Results The mean patient age was 63.5 years, with a slight male predominance (n=11, 57.8%). Indications for lung resection included pulmonary metastasectomy (n=12, 63.2%) and primary lung adenocarcinoma (n=7, 36.8%). The indication for microcoil guidance was a deep nodule in 36.8% (n=7) of cases and in 63.1% (n=12) of cases an impalpable nodule due to small size or ground glass appearance. The technical success of microcoil placement was 94.3% (n=18), with one displaced microcoil early in the series. No pneumothorax requiring intervention occurred and no major radiological complications from microcoil placement seen in the series. All lesions were successfully resected, with clear histologic margins and no major surgical complications. The mean chest drain duration was 3.4 days and mean hospital stay 4.6 days. Conclusions CT-guided pulmonary microcoil insertion is a safe, reliable, and reproducible technique for intraoperative identification of small or impalpable pulmonary nodules. It addresses some of the limitations of previous localisation methods and demonstrates excellent outcomes in an Australian setting. Future developments may include indocyanine green-coated microcoils for fluorescence guidance during robotic-assisted thoracic surgery.
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.