Efficacy of a Fully Implantable Pleural Device in the Management of Complex Pleural Effusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
VATS talc poudrage is the standard treatment for recurrent pleural effusion, but it is not feasible when the lung does not re-expand, or for fragile patients who are unfit for general anesthesia. In these situations, indwelling pleural catheters (IPC) are a valuable option to offer long-term symptom relief and reduce hospitalization, with the only limitation being that an external portion of the device is needed in the majority of available devices. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of a fully implantable pleural catheter in managing recurrent pleural effusion in patients who are unfit for traditional treatments. A retrospective, single-center analysis was conducted from April 2018 to August 2024, involving 150 patients that underwent Celsite® DRAINAPORT implantation. The study measured the percentage of procedures with complications, the type of follow up, six months survival rate, cause of death, and the number of oncological treatments administered after implantation. Results indicated a complication rate of 12%, of which most were mild and manageable. Over half of the patients were successfully managed by home nursing services. Nearly 50% of the patients survived after six months, whereas 28.7% received subsequent oncological treatments. This suggests that this type of device is a safe and effective alternative for managing recurrent pleural effusion in patients with limited treatment options.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".