Wall suction-assisted image-guided thoracentesis: a safe alternative to evacuated bottles.

AIM

To compare the safety of evacuated bottle-assisted thoracentesis with wall suction-assisted thoracentesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective study of 161 consecutive patients who underwent 191 evacuated bottle-assisted thoracenteses from 1 January 2012 to 30 September 2012, and 188 consecutive patients who underwent 230 wall suction-assisted thoracenteses from 1 January 2013 to 30 September 2013 was conducted. All procedures used imaging guidance. Primary diagnosis, age, gender, total fluid volume removed, and adverse events (AE) up to 30 days post-procedure were recorded and graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.0 (CTCAE).

RESULTS

Overall AE rates were 42.9% (82/191) for the evacuated bottle group and 19.6% (45/230) for the wall suction group (p<0.0001). Grade I AE occurred more commonly in the evacuated bottle group than in the wall suction group, [41.9% (80/191) and 18.3% (42/230)], respectively (p<0.0001). No significant differences were observed in grade 2 [0.5% (1/191) and 0% (0/230), p=0.45] or grade 3 AE [0.5% (1/191) and 1.3% (3/230), p=0.63] between the evacuated bottle and wall suction groups, respectively. No grade 4 or 5 AE occurred. Excluding transient chest pain and cough, there was no statistical difference in overall AE rate between the evacuated bottle and wall suction groups [11% (21/191) and 8.3% (19/230), p=0.4].

CONCLUSION

Image-guided thoracentesis performed with wall suction is safe when compared to evacuated bottles. The use of wall suction, in comparison to evacuated bottles, may decrease the incidence of transient chest pain or cough.