Reason for withdrawal from publication
The review authors were unable to update this work due to time constraints. The review was withdrawn from The Cochrane Library, issue 4, 2009.
The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
What's new
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 22 July 2009 | Amended | Withdrawn from The Cochrane Library, issue 4, 2009 |
History
Protocol first published: Issue 1, 2000 Review first published: Issue 2, 2002
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 7 August 2008 | Amended | Converted to new review format. |
| 3 August 2005 | New search has been performed | We re‐ran the electronic searches in March 2005 and found no new studies that could be included. There were three studies that were retrospective reviews of practice (Athanassiadi 2003; Baranwal 2003; Yilmaz 2002) and four that were comparisons of treatments (Anstadt 2003; Balci 2002; Hilliard 2003; Petrakis 2004) but were also retrospective descriptions. Cohen (Cohen 2003) compared chest drain plus antibiotics with primary thoracoscopic drainage but was excluded as it was not a contemporaneous study. Gates (Gates 2004) undertook a systematic review of empyema treatment in children but a meta‐analysis could not be done as the studies were retrospective institutional series with inherent bias and varying outcome measures. |
Withdrawn from publication for reasons stated in the review