Grodzin C J, Balk R A
Department of Internal Medicine, Rush Presbyterian-St. Lukes Medical Center and Rush Medical College, Chicago, USA.
Chest. 1997 Apr;111(4):981-8. doi: 10.1378/chest.111.4.981.
To evaluate the clinical safety, efficacy, and cost of a small indwelling pleural catheter (7F, Turkel Safety Thoracentesis System [Sherwood, Davis, and Geck; St. Louis]) vs repeated needle thoracentesis or closed tube thoracostomy as a means to drain a large-volume pleural effusion.
Inpatients in a tertiary care university teaching hospital in urban Chicago.
Prospective, consecutive patient comparative study using historical controls.
Fifty-seven therapeutic aspirations in 23 patients with large pleural effusions as defined by opacification of at least one third of the hemithorax on chest radiography. Patients were excluded if they had a history of thoracic surgery, documented loculations, structural chest abnormalities, severe coagulopathy, or refused to give informed consent.
Volume of each pleural aspiration, total fluid removed, pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase, protein, glucose, cytologic analysis, microbiologic stains, and cultures based on clinical indications.
We found that initial thoracentesis and repeated pleural drainage using the indwelling catheter system is a safe, efficacious, and cost-effective procedure that may aid the evacuation and management of a large-volume pleural effusion. There were fewer adverse effects and complications such as pneumothorax, splenic laceration, hemopneumothorax, local pain, dry tap, and hematomas, as compared with previous reports. The overall complication rate was 12% (7/57). There were two pneumothoraces detected (3.5%), one of which required closed tube thoracostomy for treatment (1.75%). A further benefit comes in the form of a significant cost savings at our institution ($80 vs $240) when this needle-catheter system is used in place of closed tube thoracostomy in the drainage of a large-volume pleural effusion.
An indwelling pleural catheter with the Turkel safety needle-catheter (as described in the study) can be used to successfully drain the pleural space with reduced morbidity and a significant cost saving in comparison to repeated needle thoracenteses or closed tube thoracostomy.
评估小型留置胸腔导管(7F,Turkel安全胸腔穿刺系统[Sherwood, Davis, and Geck;圣路易斯])与重复胸腔穿刺术或闭式胸腔引流术相比,作为引流大量胸腔积液的一种手段,其临床安全性、有效性和成本。
芝加哥市区一家三级医疗大学教学医院的住院患者。
采用历史对照的前瞻性、连续患者比较研究。
23例大量胸腔积液患者进行了57次治疗性胸腔穿刺抽液,大量胸腔积液定义为胸部X线片上至少一侧胸腔三分之一区域出现致密影。有胸外科手术史、记录有胸膜粘连、胸部结构异常、严重凝血功能障碍或拒绝签署知情同意书的患者被排除。
每次胸腔穿刺抽液量、总引流量、胸腔积液乳酸脱氢酶、蛋白质、葡萄糖、细胞学分析、微生物染色以及根据临床指征进行的培养。
我们发现,首次胸腔穿刺及使用留置导管系统进行重复胸腔引流是一种安全、有效且具有成本效益的方法,有助于大量胸腔积液的排出和管理。与既往报道相比,气胸、脾破裂、血气胸、局部疼痛、干抽及血肿等不良反应和并发症更少。总体并发症发生率为12%(7/57)。检测到两例气胸(3.5%),其中一例需要进行闭式胸腔引流术治疗(1.75%)。当使用这种针-导管系统代替闭式胸腔引流术引流大量胸腔积液时,我院还实现了显著的成本节约(80美元对240美元)。
与重复胸腔穿刺术或闭式胸腔引流术相比,带有Turkel安全针-导管(如本研究所述)的留置胸腔导管可成功引流胸腔,降低发病率并显著节约成本。