ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2026
Connecting the dots: historical perspective on lung volume reduction.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
Lung volume reduction (LVR) has evolved over nearly a century as a therapeutic strategy for advanced emphysema, reflecting cycles of innovation, skepticism, and renewed acceptance informed by advances in physiology, imaging, and patient selection. Early surgical approaches-including bullectomy, intracavitary drainage techniques, and nonselective lung resection-laid the conceptual groundwork but were limited by high morbidity and inconsistent outcomes. The modern era of LVR was catalyzed by refined surgical techniques and culminated in the National Emphysema Treatment Trial, which established the critical importance of phenotype-based patient selection. Parallel advances in bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) expanded treatment options, particularly through the development of endobronchial valves (EBVs), coils, thermal vapor ablation, and biologic approaches. Among these, EBVs have achieved the strongest evidence base and regulatory approval, supported by improved understanding of collateral ventilation and fissure integrity. More recently, minimally invasive surgical approaches, robotic-assisted techniques, hybrid procedures, and expanded indications-including lower-lobe disease, very severe airflow limitation, and alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD)-have further broadened the therapeutic landscape. LVR also plays an evolving role as an adjunct to lung transplantation, both as a bridge and for management of native lung hyperinflation (NLH). This narrative review traces the historical arc of LVR, highlighting how past successes and failures inform contemporary practice. As technology advances, multidisciplinary evaluation and increasingly personalized, data-driven decision-making will be central to optimizing outcomes and guiding the future of emphysema management.
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.