ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Efficacy and safety of urokinase in the treatment of loculated pleural effusions caused by various etiologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2026. 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.
- Urokinase redux: route, compartment, access, and pharmacological evolution from native urokinase to recombinant prourokinase.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Loculated pleural effusion caused by fibrinous septation often leads to incomplete drainage and prolonged hospitalization. Urokinase facilitates fibrin degradation; however, its overall efficacy and safety across different etiologies remain uncertain. This meta-analysis evaluated the clinical effectiveness and safety of intrapleural urokinase for loculated pleural effusions of various causes. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) was performed up to December 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing urokinase plus standard drainage with drainage alone or with saline were included. Eligible studies enrolled patients with radiologically confirmed loculated or multiloculated pleural effusions and reported at least one quantitative efficacy or safety outcome. Trials using other fibrinolytics or steroids were excluded. The primary outcome was treatment success rate. Secondary outcomes included total drainage volume (mL), hospital stay (days), and adverse events. Data were synthesized using RevMan 5.4. Subgroup analyses were performed based on etiology and control group intervention (thoracentesis Results: Twenty-five RCTs involving 1,990 patients (1,018 urokinase; 972 controls) met the inclusion criteria. Urokinase significantly improved treatment success rate [odds ratio (OR) =5.28, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.98-7.01; P<0.001] and increased total drainage volume [mean difference (MD) =622.32 mL, 95% CI: 377.22-867.43; P<0.001]. It shortened pleural effusion absorption time (MD =-7.31 days), hospital stay (MD =-6.94 days), and reduced residual pleural thickness (MD =-0.93 mm; all P<0.05). Subgroup analysis based on control group intervention (thoracentesis Conclusions: Intrapleural urokinase appears to be a safe and effective adjunctive therapy for loculated pleural effusions of diverse etiologies, consistently improving drainage and clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, the certainty of evidence is limited by moderate study quality, dosing heterogeneity, and potential publication bias. Further high-quality randomized trials are warranted. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024581473).
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.