ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2026
Clinical and Procedural Predictive Model for Pneumothorax Risk After CT-Guided Lung Biopsy.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2026. 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
Purpose: To develop and validate a model integrating clinical/imaging and procedural variables to predict pneumothorax after CT-guided percutaneous lung nodule biopsy. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 395 patients and split them 7:3 into training (n=276) and validation (n=119) cohorts. Variables with P < 0.15 in group comparisons (combined with clinical relevance) were selected as candidates and analyzed using age- and sex-adjusted univariable logistic regression. Two prespecified logistic models were fitted: a baseline model (clinical/imaging variables only) and a full model (baseline plus procedural variables). Discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility were assessed using ROC curves, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Pneumothorax occurred in 22.1% (training) and 22.7% (validation). The baseline model contained BMI and emphysema grade; the full model additionally included patient position (prone or lateral vs supine) and the number of needle adjustments. In training, the full model outperformed the baseline (AUC 0.722 vs 0.630; P=0.018). In validation, AUC was 0.720 vs 0.670 (P=0.307), but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Sensitivity was higher with the full model (0.667 vs 0.593). Both models showed good calibration; the full model was closer to the ideal line across predicted probabilities of 0.1-0.5. DCA indicated greater net benefit for the full model across most threshold probabilities. Conclusion: A model combining clinical/imaging and procedural characteristics may facilitate peri-operative risk communication and support peri-procedural risk management for CT-guided lung nodule biopsy.
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.