23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Surgical and nonsurgical outcomes for treating a cohort of empyema thoracis patients: A monocenteric retrospective cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          There are several studies reporting high success rates for surgical and nonsurgical treatments of empyema separately. The aim of current retrospective cohort study is to find the best treatment in low socio-economic areas.

          Material and methods

          A total of 149 patients were treated in the referring hospital from January 2002 to December 2008. The current retrospective cohort study was carried out by nonsurgical (medically & thoracenthesis & chest tube drainage with or without fibrinolytic agents) and surgical (VATS &open thoracotomy decortication methods) procedures in single center performed in thoracic and respiratory medicine wards. The independent t-test on demographic data was the statistical test tool.

          Results

          The complete cure and mortality rates for 130 patients were 27% (35 out of 130 patients) and 0.3% (1 out of 130 patients), respectively. Thirteen out of 149 patients that were estimated to be at stage II underwent VATS decortication. The results showed zero success rates for this procedure which was then converted to open thoracotomy decortication. And, 113 patients who underwent thoracotomy decortication had a cure rate of 96.4% (109 patients) and mortality rate of 1.8% (2 patients). Four (3.5%) patients needed thoracoplasty, 2 died and 2 (1.8%) needed open window thoracostomy resulted in empyema necessitans that remained uncured. Total hospitalization lengths for the patients treated by tube thoracostomy and thoracotomy decortication were (15.4 ± 2.1) and (6.2 ± 1.8) days (P < 0.001), respectively. The success rates between surgical and nonsurgical treatments were 98.2% and 27.1%. And, the difference between them was significant (P < 0.001).

          Conclusion

          Because of the advanced stages of empyema in our patients, thoracotomy decortication procedure is often the first rank choice with success rates higher than nonsurgical techniques. However, nowadays, the success rates of nonsurgical and VATS management of empyema thoracis are mostly reported in the literature.

          Highlights

          • Outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management for treating empyema thoracis patients were presented based on STROCSS criteria.

          • Due to advanced stages of empyema in low socioendemic areas, thoracotomy decortication procedure proposed higher success rates.

          • Success and cure rates, and hospitalization time showed significant differences between surgical and nonsurgical procedures.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions : an evidence-based guideline.

          A panel was convened by the Health and Science Policy Committee of the American College of Chest Physicians to develop a clinical practice guideline on the medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions (PPE) using evidence-based methods. Based on consensus of clinical opinion, the expert panel developed an annotated table for evaluating the risk for poor outcome in patients with PPE. Estimates of the risk for poor outcome were based on the clinical judgment that, without adequate drainage of the pleural space, the patient with PPE would be likely to have any or all of the following: prolonged hospitalization, prolonged evidence of systemic toxicity, increased morbidity from any drainage procedure, increased risk for residual ventilatory impairment, increased risk for local spread of the inflammatory reaction, and increased mortality. Three variables, pleural space anatomy, pleural fluid bacteriology, and pleural fluid chemistry, were used in this annotated table to categorize patients into four separate risk levels for poor outcome: categories 1 (very low risk), 2 (low risk), 3 (moderate risk), and 4 (high risk). The panel's consensus opinion supported drainage for patients with moderate (category 3) or high (category 4) risk for a poor outcome, but not for patients with very low (category 1) or low (category 2) risk for a poor outcome. The medical literature was reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of medical and surgical management approaches for patients with PPE at moderate or high risk for poor outcome. The panel grouped PPE management approaches into six categories: no drainage performed, therapeutic thoracentesis, tube thoracostomy, fibrinolytics, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and surgery (including thoracotoiny with or without decortication and rib resection). The fibrinolytic approach required tube thoracostomy for administration of drug, and VATS included post-procedure tube thoracostomy. Surgery may have included concomitant lung resection and always included postoperative tube thoracostomy. All management approaches included appropriate treatment of the underlying pneumonia, including systemic antibiotics. Criteria for including articles in the panel review were adequate data provided for >/=20 adult patients with PPE to allow evaluation of at least one relevant outcome (death or need for a second intervention to manage the PPE); reasonable assurance provided that drainage was clinically appropriate (patients receiving drainage were either category 3 or category 4) and drainage procedure was adequately described; and original data were presented. The strength of panel recommendations on management of PPE was based on the following approach: level A, randomized, controlled trials with consistent results or individual randomized, controlled trial with narrow confidence interval (CI); level B, controlled cohort and case control series; level C, historically controlled series and case series; and level D, expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal or based on physiology, bench research, or "first principles." The literature review revealed 24 articles eligible for full review by the panel, 19 of which dealt with the primary management approach to PPE and 5 with a rescue approach after a previous approach had failed. Of the 19 involving the primary management approach to PPE, there were 3 randomized, controlled trials, 2 historically controlled series, and 14 case series. The number of patients included in the randomized controlled trials was small; methodologic weaknesses were found in the 19 articles describing the results of primary management approaches to PPE. The proportion and 95% CI of patients suffering each of the two relevant outcomes (death and need for a second intervention to manage the PPE) were calculated for the pooled data for each management approach from the 19 articles on the primary management approach. (ABST
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Current surgical treatment of thoracic empyema in adults.

            F. Molnár (2007)
            A review of the recent literature on treatment modalities of adult thoracic empyema was conducted in order to expose the controversies and verify where consensus exists. Critical reading filtered through clinical experience was the method followed. The roles of surgical drainage, lavage techniques, debridement via VATS, decortication, thoracoplasty and open window thoracostomy were considered using the Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine criteria. The roles of the different therapeutical modalities were interpreted in the light of the triphasic nature of empyema thoracis. The randomised controlled trials came up with conflicting results. With two exceptions all of the papers reviewed provide level (2b) or below evidences. The lack of a single ideal treatment modality or policy reflects the complexity of the diagnosis and staging of this heterogeneous disease. Basic elements of intervention--drainage, different evacuation techniques, decortication, thoracoplasty and open window thoracostomy--are well-established technical modalities; however, neither a universally acceptable primary modality nor the gold standard of their sequence is available. Drainage remains to be the initial treatment modality in Phase I disease. Debridement via VATS is a safe, reliable and efficient method in the fibrinopurulent phase. Organised pleural callus requires formal decortication. Open window thoracostomy is a simple and safe procedure for high-risk patients and results in quick detoxication. Thoracoplasty kept its final role in pleural space management. Acute postoperative bronchial stump insufficiency requires immediate surgery. Evacuation of toxic material is mandatory. No single-stage procedure offers a solution. An optimised agressivity treatment modality should be tailored to the condition of the patient and to the potential of the persisting cavity. Decision-making involves a triad consisting of the aetiology of empyema (i.e. primary vs secondary), general condition of the patient and stage of disease, while considering the triphasic nature of development of thoracic empyema. The current attitudes show that the present concepts are based mainly on expert opinion. Flexibility and patience on behalf of the surgeon and nursing staff, the patient and the hospital management, as well as a good understanding of the complexity of this condition are the cornerstones of the treatment. No exclusive sequence of procedures leading to a uniformly predictable successful outcome is available. Individualised approaches can be recommended based on institutional practice and local protocols. Thoracic empyema in general seems to remain resilient to fit completely into the categories of evidence-based medical approach.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Surgical versus non-surgical management for pleural empyema

              Empyema refers to pus in the pleural space, commonly due to adjacent pneumonia, chest wall injury, or a complication of thoracic surgery. A range of therapeutic options are available for its management, ranging from percutaneous aspiration and intercostal drainage to video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or thoracotomy drainage. Intrapleural fibrinolytics may also be administered following intercostal drain insertion to facilitate pleural drainage. There is currently a lack of consensus regarding optimal treatment. To assess the effectiveness and safety of surgical versus non‐surgical treatments for complicated parapneumonic effusion or pleural empyema. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE (Ebscohost) (1946 to July week 3 2013, July 2015 to October 2016) and MEDLINE (Ovid) (1 May 2013 to July week 1 2015), Embase (2010 to October 2016), CINAHL (1981 to October 2016) and LILACS (1982 to October 2016) on 20 October 2016. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing studies (December 2016). Randomised controlled trials that compared a surgical with a non‐surgical method of management for all age groups with pleural empyema. Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked the data for accuracy. We contacted trial authors for additional information. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We included eight randomised controlled trials with a total of 391 participants. Six trials focused on children and two on adults. Trials compared tube thoracostomy drainage (non‐surgical), with or without intrapleural fibrinolytics, to either VATS or thoracotomy (surgical) for the management of pleural empyema. Assessment of risk of bias for the included studies was generally unclear for selection and blinding but low for attrition and reporting bias. Data analyses compared thoracotomy versus tube thoracostomy and VATS versus tube thoracostomy. We pooled data for meta‐analysis where appropriate. We performed a subgroup analysis for children along with a sensitivity analysis for studies that used fibrinolysis in non‐surgical treatment arms. The comparison of open thoracotomy versus thoracostomy drainage included only one study in children, which reported no deaths in either treatment arm. However, the trial showed a statistically significant reduction in mean hospital stay of 5.90 days for those treated with primary thoracotomy. It also showed a statistically significant reduction in procedural complications for those treated with thoracotomy compared to thoracostomy drainage. We downgraded the quality of the evidence for length of hospital stay and procedural complications outcomes to moderate due to the small sample size. The comparison of VATS versus thoracostomy drainage included seven studies, which we pooled in a meta‐analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality or procedural complications between groups. This was true for both adults and children with or without fibrinolysis. However, mortality data were limited: one study reported one death in each treatment arm, and seven studies reported no deaths. There was a statistically significant reduction in mean length of hospital stay for those treated with VATS. The subgroup analysis showed the same result in adults, but there was insufficient evidence to estimate an effect for children. We could not perform a separate analysis for fibrinolysis for this outcome because all included studies used fibrinolysis in the non‐surgical arms. We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low for mortality (due to wide confidence intervals and indirectness), and moderate for other outcomes in this comparison due to either high heterogeneity or wide confidence intervals. Our findings suggest there is no statistically significant difference in mortality between primary surgical and non‐surgical management of pleural empyema for all age groups. Video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery may reduce length of hospital stay compared to thoracostomy drainage alone. There was insufficient evidence to assess the impact of fibrinolytic therapy. A number of common outcomes were reported in the included studies that were not directly examined in our primary and secondary outcomes. These included duration of chest tube drainage, duration of fever, analgesia requirement, and total cost of treatment. Future studies focusing on patient‐centred outcomes, such as patient functional scores, and other clinically relevant outcomes, such as radiographic improvement, treatment failure rates, and amount of fluid drainage, are needed to inform clinical decisions. Review question We investigated if there was a difference in outcomes for patients who develop pus in the space around the lungs (empyema) among those who had surgical treatment and people who had non‐surgical treatment. We looked for differences in proportions of children and adults who survived, time in hospital, and complications from treatments. Background Pus can form in the space around the lungs as a result of pneumonia, complication of chest wall trauma, or surgery. Solid divisions, called loculations, can form within the pus. The infection does not usually improve with antibiotic treatment alone. There are several surgical and non‐surgical treatments. Non‐surgical treatments include draining pus using a needle inserted through the chest wall (thoracentesis) or by inserting a tube through the chest wall to drain infection (thoracostomy). If a chest tube is inserted, drugs can be injected into the space around the lungs to break down the divisions. This is called fibrinolysis. Non‐surgical treatments can cause harms, including air in the space around the lungs, damage to chest tissue, or lungs filling with fluid as they re‐expand. Surgical treatment involves either opening the chest cavity and clearing out the infection (thoracotomy) or clearing out infection through small cuts on the chest wall with the aid of a camera, known as video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). A chest tube drains any fluids after surgery. Risks from surgery include air in the space around the lungs, rib pain, and anaesthetic complications. Search date The evidence is current to October 2016. Study characteristics We included eight trials with a total of 391 participants. Six trials focused on children and two on adults. The trials compared chest tube drainage (non‐surgical), with or without fibrinolysis, to either VATS or thoracotomy (surgical). Study funding sources Two studies declared no financial conflicts of interest; the remaining six studies did not report funding source. Key results There was no difference in the proportion of patients of all ages who survived empyema in relation to surgical or non‐surgical treatment. However, this finding was based on limited data: one study reported one death with each treatment option, and seven studies reported no deaths. There was no difference in rates of complications between patients treated with surgical or non‐surgical options. There was limited evidence to suggest that VATS reduced length of stay in hospital compared to non‐surgical treatments. Quality of evidence The quality of the evidence was moderate overall. The main limitations were few included studies for each analysis and inconsistencies among studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Ann Med Surg (Lond)
                Ann Med Surg (Lond)
                Annals of Medicine and Surgery
                Elsevier
                2049-0801
                13 October 2017
                December 2017
                13 October 2017
                : 24
                : 19-24
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                [b ]Liver and Gastrointestinal Disease Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                [c ]Nuclear Medicine Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
                [d ]Biotechnology Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                Author notes
                Article
                S2049-0801(17)30368-0
                10.1016/j.amsu.2017.10.002
                5647471
                7ffe3dbf-74d6-4881-99af-dfbf871ee836
                © 2017 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 31 August 2017
                : 6 October 2017
                : 6 October 2017
                Categories
                Original Research

                empyema thoracis,decortication,tube thoracostomy,surgery,vats

                Comments

                Comment on this article