Cochrane · systematic review · CD004479

Simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for primary spontaneous pneumothorax in adults

Carson‐Chahhoud, KV, Wakai, A, van Agteren, JEM, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2017 · Cochrane Library

Emergency and Critical CareAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
6
No studies
1
Included studies
NR
No studies 1 · 14.3%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 14.3%Low 2 · 28.6%Moderate 3 · 42.9%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Simple aspiration compared with intercostal tube drainage for primary spontaneous pneumothorax

Population: adults with primary spontaneous pneumothorax
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Immediate success rate
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
RR 0.78 [0.69, 0.89]6 studies · 435 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
One‐year success rate
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
RR 1.07 [0.96, 1.18]4 studies · 318 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Hospitalization rate
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
RR 0.6 [0.25, 1.47]3 studies · 245 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias
Duration of hospital stay
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
no estimate extracted5 studies · 387 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Adverse events
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
no estimate extracted3 studies · 245 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Cost‐effectiveness Not reported
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Patient satisfaction
Simple aspiration vs intercostal tube drainage
no estimate extracted1 study · 48 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias