ArticleCHEST pulmonary2026
Recurrent Malignant Pleural Effusion Management: Evaluating Quality Gaps, Outcomes, Costs, and Adherence to Guideline-Consistent Care.
Article in CHEST pulmonary, 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.
- Unraveling the multidimensional pleural ecosystem of lung cancer-associated malignant pleural effusion.Cancer cell international · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Guidelines recommend early definitive management (indwelling pleural catheter, pleurodesis, decortication, or combination approach) for patients with symptomatic, rapidly recurrent malignant pleural effusion (MPE). This study evaluates health care utilization among patients who received early definitive management (EDM), defined as definitive management at first episode of rapidly recurrent MPE, compared with patients who do not (no early definitive management [NEDM]). Research Question: What percentage of patients with rapidly recurrent symptomatic MPE receive guideline-consistent EDM and are there differences in care outcomes? Study Design and Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed medical records from Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (a 500-bed primary teaching hospital) from 2018 to 2022. The cohort included patients with biopsy-proven MPE and rapid recurrence within 14 days of the initial thoracentesis, requiring a second pleural procedure. We compared the outcomes between patients who received EDM and those with NEDM. Results: A total of 133 patients met the inclusion criteria: confirmed malignancy on initial thoracentesis and rapid recurrence requiring repeat pleural procedure within 14 days. Of these, 52 patients (39%) received EDM, whereas 81 (61%) underwent repeat thoracentesis or chest tube drainage (NEDM). Compared with patients with NEDM, patients with EDM had fewer total pleural procedures (2.08 vs 3.51; Interpretation: Less than one-half of eligible patients received guideline-consistent EDM for rapidly recurrent MPE. Those not receiving EDM required more health care resources, including pleural procedures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. These findings underscore the importance of EDM in reducing health care utilization and improving patient care outcomes.
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.