Critical appraisal:AB Ogunrombi, UU Onakpoya, U Ekrikpo, AS Aderibigbe, OA Aladesuru 2014
This appraisal has been completed.
- Article
- AB Ogunrombi, UU Onakpoya, U Ekrikpo, AS Aderibigbe, OA Aladesuru. Recurrence of Malignant Pleural Effusion Following Pleurodesis: Is There a Difference Between Use of Povidone-Iodine or Cyclophosphamide? Annals of African Surgery 2014 Jul Available from: http://www.ajol.info/index.php/aas/article/view/114657.
- Assigned to
- User:Gary.hammerschlag
- Topic area
- Guidelines:Lung cancer
- Clinical question
- Study design
- case series
- Level of Evidence
- III-3
Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer
Critical Appraisal
AB Ogunrombi, UU Onakpoya, U Ekrikpo, AS Aderibigbe, OA Aladesuru. Recurrence of Malignant Pleural Effusion Following Pleurodesis: Is There a Difference Between Use of Povidone-Iodine or Cyclophosphamide? Annals of African Surgery 2014 Jul Available from: http://www.ajol.info/index.php/aas/article/view/114657.
Key Facts
case series
The study aimed to determine the efficacy of Povidone-iodine (PIP) and Cyclophosphamide (CPP)for pleurodesis
34
Breast Cancer was most common cause of malignant effusions: 47.1%
Pleurodesis success rate
Number of patients requiring second attempt at pleurodesis
Adverse Events
Complete Response at 1 month
CCP vs PIP: 76.47% vs 41.16%
Partial Response at 1 month
CCP vs PIP: 11.76% vs 47.06%
No reponse
CCP vs PIP: 5.88% vs 11.76%
1 patient required 2 attempts at pleurodesis (unclear to which group they were assigned)
52.9% of patients has no pain, 47.1% of patients had insignificant pain.
There was no recorded fever
no
Evidence ratings
III-3
| High risk of bias | Comments: Subject selection is unclear from the study. There is no mention whether this was a single or multi institution study |
| 3 | Reason for decision: Please replace this text and briefly describe the reasons for your rating |
| 2 | Additional comments: Please replace this text and briefly describe the reasons for your rating |
Included