Thoracentesis techniques: A literature review

Author:

Mohammed Asna1,Hochfeld Uri1,Hong Sung2,Hosseini Davood K.3,Kim Kevin2,Omidvari Karan2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Internal Medicine, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA

2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA

3. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA.

Abstract

Thoracentesis is performed by 4 methods: gravity, manual aspiration, vacuum-bottle suction, and wall suction. This literature review investigates the safety of these techniques and determines if there is significant difference in complication rates. A comprehensive literature search revealed 6 articles studying thoracentesis techniques and their complication rates, reviewing 20,815 thoracenteses: 80 (0.4%) by gravity, 9431 (45.3%) by manual aspiration, 3498 (16.8%) by vacuum-bottle suction, 7580 (36.4%) by wall suction and 226 (1.1%) unspecified. Of the 6 studies, 2 were smaller with 100 and 140 patients respectively. Overall, there was a 4.4% complication rate including hemothoraces, pneumothoraces, re-expansion pulmonary edema (REPE), chest discomfort, bleeding at the site, pain, and vasovagal episodes. The pneumothorax and REPE rate was 2.5%. Sub-analyzed by each method, there was a 47.5% (38/80) complication rate in the gravity group, 1.2% (115/9431) in the manual aspiration group including 0.7% pneumothorax or REPE, 8% (285/3498) in the vacuum-bottle group including 3.7% pneumothorax or REPE, 4% (309/7580) in the wall suction group all of which were either pneumothorax or REPE, and 73% (166/226) in the unspecified group most of which were vasovagal episodes. Procedure duration was less in the suction groups versus gravity drainage. The 2 smaller studies indicated that in the vacuum groups, early procedure termination rate from respiratory failure was significantly higher than non-vacuum techniques. Significant complication rate from thoracentesis by any technique is low. Suction drainage was noted to have a lower procedure time. Symptom-limited thoracentesis is safe using vacuum or wall suction even with large volumes drained. Other factors such as procedure duration, quantity of fluid removed, number of needle passes, patients’ BMI, and operator technique may have more of an impact on complication rate than drainage modality. All suction modalities of drainage seem to be safe. Operator technique, attention to symptom development, amount of fluid removed, and intrapleural pressure changes may be important in predicting complication development, and therefore, may be useful in choosing which technique to employ. Specific drainage modes and their complications need to be further studied.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3