Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Division of Infectious Diseases and Division of Public Health Sciences, Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Jun;105(6):1589-1596. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.02.027. Epub 2018 Mar 14.
Empyema affects up to 65,000 patients annually in the United States. Recent consensus guidelines demonstrate ambiguity about optimal treatment. We examined current treatment practices and outcomes for inpatient treatment of empyema using a comprehensive, longitudinal data set that encompasses an entire state cohort of hospitalized patients.
We queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project New York State Inpatient Database (2009 to 2014) for patients with primary empyema and subsequent readmissions. Patients were categorized into three groups by definitive treatment during their initial hospitalization: chest tube drainage, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) decortication and drainage, or open decortication and drainage. Treatment outcomes, including success rates, readmission, reintervention, and mortality, were compared between groups.
The cohort included 4,095 patients undergoing intervention for primary empyema discharged during this period with chest tube, VATS, or open drainage and decortication. Most patients received definitive operative management (chest tube: 38.2%, VATS: 32.1%, open: 29.8%; p < 0.001). Patients had a high mortality rate during their initial hospitalization (chest tube: 15.4%, VATS: 4.7%, open: 6.0%; p < 0.001) and a substantial 30-day readmission rate for empyema (chest tube: 7.3%, VATS: 3.8%, open: 4.1%; p < 0.001), with reintervention at readmission significantly higher for chest tube (6.1%) vs surgical patients (VATS: 1.9%, open 2.1%; p < 0.001).
This study characterizes recent treatment practices of patients with empyema. Higher readmission and reintervention rates were observed in patients managed with chest tubes, suggesting some of these patients may benefit from earlier definitive surgical intervention.
在美国,每年有多达 65000 名患者患有脓胸。最近的共识指南表明,对于最佳治疗方法存在模糊性。我们使用涵盖整个住院患者州队列的全面、纵向数据集,检查了脓胸住院治疗的当前治疗方法和结果。
我们从医疗保健成本和利用项目纽约州住院数据库(2009 年至 2014 年)中查询了原发性脓胸和随后再次入院的患者。根据他们在初次住院期间的明确治疗方法,将患者分为三组:胸腔引流管、电视辅助胸腔镜手术(VATS)去皮质和引流,或开放去皮质和引流。比较各组之间的治疗结果,包括成功率、再入院、再干预和死亡率。
该队列包括在此期间接受干预以治疗原发性脓胸的 4095 名患者,他们出院时接受了胸腔引流管、VATS 或开放引流和去皮质治疗。大多数患者接受了明确的手术治疗(胸腔引流管:38.2%,VATS:32.1%,开放:29.8%;p < 0.001)。患者在初次住院期间死亡率较高(胸腔引流管:15.4%,VATS:4.7%,开放:6.0%;p < 0.001),脓胸 30 天再入院率也很高(胸腔引流管:7.3%,VATS:3.8%,开放:4.1%;p < 0.001),再入院时胸腔引流管(6.1%)再干预率明显高于手术患者(VATS:1.9%,开放:2.1%;p < 0.001)。
本研究描述了脓胸患者最近的治疗方法。使用胸腔引流管治疗的患者再入院和再干预率较高,表明其中一些患者可能受益于更早的确定性手术干预。