aRespiratory Diseases Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
bDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
cDepartment of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Università degli Studi di Brescia, Brescia, Italy
dOxford Pleural Unit, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
eOxford NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, Oxford, UK
fChinese Academy of Medicine Oxford Institute, Oxford, UK
Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.
Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more
CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *
Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!
If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.
Save over 20% compared to the individual article price. Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more Select* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.
Article / Publication DetailsFirst-Page Preview
Received: June 17, 2022
Accepted: January 04, 2023
Published online: January 24, 2023
Number of Print Pages: 10
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 1
ISSN: 0025-7931 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0356 (Online)
For additional information: https://www.karger.com/RES
AbstractBackground: Pleural infection represents a significant clinical challenge worldwide. Although prompt drainage of pleural fluid is thought to play a key role in pleural infection management, the optimal size of intrapleural catheter has yet to be defined. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize data on efficacy and complications of small-bore drain (SBD), defined as ≤14F, in comparison to large-bore drain (LBD) in patients with pleural infection. Method: We searched MEDLINE and Embase for all studies reporting outcomes of interest published up to October 2021. Two authors reviewed selected full text to identify studies according to predefined eligibility criteria. Summary estimates were derived using the random-effects model. Results: Twelve original studies were included for qualitative analysis and 7 of these for quantitative analysis. The surgical referral rate of SBD and LBD were, respectively, 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12–0.21) and 0.20 (95% CI, 0.10–0.32), the pooled mortality were 0.12 (95% CI, 0.05–0.21) and 0.20 (95% CI, 0.10–0.32), and the length of hospital stay was 24 days in both groups. Data on complications suggest similar proportions of tube dislodgement. Intensity of pain was evaluated in one study only, reporting higher scores for LBD. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide the first synthesis of data on performance of SBD and LBD in management of pleural infection, and, overall, clinical outcomes and complications did not substantially differ, although the limited number of studies and the absence of dedicated randomized trials does limit the reliability of results.
© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel
References Bedawi EO, Hassan M, McCracken D, Rahman NM. Pleural infection: a closer look at the etiopathogenesis, microbiology and role of antibiotics. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2019;13(4):337–47. Farjah F, Symons RG, Krishnadasan B, Wood DE, Flum DR. Management of pleural space infections: a population-based analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;133(2):346–51. Gasparini S, Bonifazi M. Pleural diseases. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2017;23(3):269–74. Søgaard M, Nielsen RB, Nørgaard M, Kornum JB, Schønheyder HC, Thomsen RW. Incidence, length of stay, and prognosis of hospitalized patients with pleural empyema: a 15-year Danish nationwide cohort study. Chest. 2014;145(1):189–92. Cargill TN, Hassan M, Corcoran JP, Harriss E, Asciak R, Mercer RM, et al. A systematic review of comorbidities and outcomes of adult patients with pleural infection. Eur Respir J. 2019;54(3):1900541. Hooper CE, Edey AJ, Wallis A, Clive AO, Morley A, White P, et al. Pleural irrigation trial (PIT): a randomised controlled trial of pleural irrigation with normal saline versus standard care in patients with pleural infection. Eur Respir J. 2015;46(2):456–63. Sundaralingam A, Banka R, Rahman NM. Management of pleural infection. Pulm Ther. 2021;7(1):59–74. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, Davies CW, Hedley EL, Nunn AJ, Gleeson FV, et al. The relationship between chest tube size and clinical outcome in pleural infection. Chest. 2010;137(3):536–43. Hallifax RJ, Psallidas I, Rahman NM. Chest drain size: the debate continues. Curr Pulmonol Rep. 2017;6(1):26–9. https://0.1007/s13665-017-0162-3. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12. Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, Savovic J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88. Maskell N, Davies CWH, Nunn AN, Hedley EL, Gleeson FV, Miller R, et al. U.K. Controlled trial of intrapleural Streptokinase for pleural infection. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(9):865–74. Davies HE, Merchant S, McGown A. A study of the complications of small bore “Seldinger” intercostal chest drains. Respirology. 2008;13(4):603–7. Rahman NM, Kahan BC, Miller RF, Gleeson FV, Nunn AJ, Maskell NA. A clinical score (RAPID) to identify those at risk for poor outcome at presentation in patients with pleural infection. Chest. 2014;145(4):848–55. Rahman NM, Maskell N, West A, Teoh R, Arnold A, Mackinlay C, et al. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(6):518–26. Crouch JD, Keagy BA, Delany DJ. “Pigtail” catheter drainage in thoracic surgery. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1987;136(1):174–5. Huang HC, Chang HY, Chen CW, Lee CH, Hsiue TR. Predicting factors for outcome of tube thoracostomy in complicated parapneumonic effusion for empyema. Chest. 1999;115(3):751–6. Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM, Lee MJ. Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008;31(1):135–41. Chen CH, Chen W, Chen HJ, Yu YH, Lin YC, Tu CY, et al. Transthoracic ultrasonography in predicting the outcome of small-bore catheter drainage in empyemas or complicated parapneumonic effusions. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2009;35(9):1468–74. Herrero S, Iridoy AA, Lopez V, Andrade MI, Cebollero P, Pascal I. Study of pleural empyema evolution depending on drainage size used. Eur Respir J. 2013;42(57):P2698. Velez M, Levine S, Mudassar A, Reyes L, Restrepo M. Characterization of patients with complicated parapneumonic pleural effusions. Chest. 2016;150(4):563A. Matsunuma R, Kase K, Asai N, Watanabe S, Waseda Y, Kaneko N, et al. Drainage using chest tubes smaller than 20 French is suitable for patients with thoracic empyema. Int J Respir Pulm Med. 2016;3(4):058. Bishwakarma R, Shah S, Frank L, Zhang W, Sharma G, Nishi SP. Mixing it up: coadministration of tPA/DNase in complicated parapneumonic pleural effusions and empyema. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol. 2017;24(1):40–7. Liu Y, Beckert L. Management of empyema and comoplicated parapneumonic effusion in Christchurch. Respirology. 2018;23(1):104–215. Bedat B, Plojoux J, Noel J, Morel A, Worley J, Triponez F, et al. Comparison of intrapleural use of urokinase and tissue plasminogen activator/DNAse in pleural infection. ERJ Open Res. 2019;5:00084–2019. Boulos AC, Junqueira MJ, Patel A, Reichmuth M, Nuyen R. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase for the treatment of loculated pleural effusions at a community based center: a retrospective analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199:A4722. Article / Publication DetailsFirst-Page Preview
Received: June 17, 2022
Accepted: January 04, 2023
Published online: January 24, 2023
Number of Print Pages: 10
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 1
ISSN: 0025-7931 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0356 (Online)
For additional information: https://www.karger.com/RES
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
留言 (0)