IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0084788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Iterative Thoracentesis as First-Line Treatment of Complicated Parapneumonic Effusion

Author

Listed:
  • Julien Letheulle
  • Pierre Tattevin
  • Lauren Saunders
  • Mallorie Kerjouan
  • Hervé Léna
  • Benoit Desrues
  • Yves Le Tulzo
  • Stéphane Jouneau

Abstract

Rationale: Optimal management of complicated parapneumonic effusions (CPPE) remains controversial. Objectives: to assess safety and efficacy of iterative therapeutic thoracentesis (ITTC), the first-line treatment of CPPE in Rennes University Hospital. Methods: Patients with CPPE were identified through our computerized database. We retrospectively studied all cases of CPPE initially managed with ITTC in our institution between 2001 and 2010. ITTC failure was defined by the need for additional treatment (i.e. surgery or percutaneous drainage), or death. Results: Seventy-nine consecutive patients were included. The success rate was 81% (n = 64). Only 3 patients (4%) were referred to thoracic surgery. The one-year survival rate was 88%. On multivariate analysis, microorganisms observed in pleural fluid after Gram staining and first thoracentesis volume ≥450 mL were associated with ITTC failure with adjusted odds-ratios of 7.65 [95% CI, 1.44–40.67] and 6.97 [95% CI, 1.86–26.07], respectively. The main complications of ITTC were iatrogenic pneumothorax (n = 5, 6%) and vasovagal reactions (n = 3, 4%). None of the pneumothoraces required chest tube drainage, and no hemothorax or re-expansion pulmonary edema was observed. Conclusions: Although not indicated in international recommendations, ITTC is safe and effective as first-line treatment of CPPE, with limited invasiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Julien Letheulle & Pierre Tattevin & Lauren Saunders & Mallorie Kerjouan & Hervé Léna & Benoit Desrues & Yves Le Tulzo & Stéphane Jouneau, 2014. "Iterative Thoracentesis as First-Line Treatment of Complicated Parapneumonic Effusion," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0084788
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084788
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0084788
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0084788&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0084788?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0084788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.