Two-year experience of using pigtail catheters to treat traumatic pneumothorax: a changing trend

Chest Tube Size Selection: Evaluating Provider Practices, Treatment Efficacy, and Complications in Management of Thoracic Trauma

BACKGROUND

The standard for managing traumatic pneumothorax (PTX), hemothorax (HTX), and hemopneumothorax (HPTX) has historically been large-bore (LB) chest tubes (>20-Fr). Previous studies have shown equal efficacy of small-bore (SB) chest tubes (≤19-Fr) in draining PTX and HTX/HPTX. This study aimed to evaluate provider practice patterns, treatment efficacy, and complications related to the selection of chest tube sizes for patients with thoracic trauma.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on adult patients who underwent tube thoracostomy for traumatic PTX, HTX, or HPTX at a Level 1 Trauma Center from January 2016 to December 2021. Comparison was made between SB and LB thoracostomy tubes. The primary outcome was indication for chest tube placement based on injury pattern. Secondary outcomes included retained hemothorax, insertion-related complications, and duration of chest tube placement. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and forty-one patients were included and 297 (87.1%) received LB tubes. No significant differences were found between the groups concerning tube failure and insertion-related complications. LB tubes were more frequently placed in patients with penetrating MOI, higher average ISS, and higher average thoracic AIS. Patients who received LB chest tubes experienced a higher incidence of retained HTX.

DISCUSSION

In patients with thoracic trauma, both SB and LB chest tubes may be used for treatment. SB tubes are typically placed in nonemergent situations, and there is apparent provider bias for LB tubes. A future randomized clinical trial is needed to provide additional data on the usage of SB tubes in emergent situations.

Outcomes of Pigtail Catheter Placement versus Chest Tube Placement in Adult Thoracic Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

A debate currently exists regarding the efficacy of pigtail catheters vs chest tubes in the management of thoracic trauma. This meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes of pigtail catheters vs chest tubes in adult trauma patients with thoracic injuries.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PRISMA guidelines and registered with PROSPERO. PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, Ebsco, and ProQuest electronic databases were queried for studies comparing the use of pigtail catheters vs chest tubes in adult trauma patients from database inception to August 15th, 2022. The primary outcome was the failure rate of drainage tubes, defined as requiring a second tube placement or VATS, unresolved pneumothorax, hemothorax, or hemopneumothorax requiring additional intervention. Secondary outcomes were initial drainage output, ICU-LOS, and ventilator days.

RESULTS

A total of 7 studies satisfied eligibility criteria and were assessed in the meta-analysis. The pigtail group had higher initial output volumes vs the chest tube group, with a mean difference of 114.7 mL [95% CI (70.6 mL, 158.8 mL)]. Patients in the chest tube group also had a higher risk of requiring VATS vs the pigtail group, with a relative risk of 2.77 [95% CI (1.50, 5.11)].

CONCLUSIONS

In trauma patients, pigtail catheters rather than chest tubes are associated with higher initial output volume, reduced risk of VATS, and shorter tube duration. Considering the similar rates of failure, ventilator days, and ICU length-of-stay, pigtail catheters should be considered in the management of traumatic thoracic injuries.

STUDY TYPE

Systematic Review and meta-analysis.

How emergency physicians choose chest tube size for traumatic pneumothorax or hemothorax: a comparison between 28Fr and smaller tube

Most traumatic pneumothoraxes and hemothoraxes can be managed non-operatively by means of chest tube thoracostomy. This study aimed to investigate how emergency physicians choose chest tube size and whether chest tube size affects patient outcome. We reviewed medical charts of patients who underwent chest tube insertion for chest trauma within 24 hours of admission in this retrospective, single-institution study. Patient characteristics, inserted tube size, risk of additional tube, and complications were evaluated. Eighty-six chest tubes were placed in 64 patients. Sixty-seven tubes were placed initially, and 19 additionally, which was significantly smaller than the initial tube. Initial tube size was 28 Fr in 38 and <28 Fr in 28 patients. Indications were pneumothorax (n=24), hemothorax (n=7), and hemopneumothorax (n=36). Initial tube size was not related to sex, BMI, BSA, indication, ISS, RTS, chest AIS, or respiratory status. An additional tube was placed in the same thoracic cavity for residual pneumothorax (n=13), hemothorax (n=1), hemopneumothorax (n=1), and inappropriate extrapleural placement (n=3). Risk of additional tube placement was not significantly different depending on tube size. No additional tube was placed for tube occlusion or surgical intervention for residual clotted hemothorax. Emergency physicians did not choose tube size depending on patient sex, body size, or situation. Even with a <28 Fr tube placed in chest trauma patients, the risk of residual hemo/pneumothorax and tube occlusion did not increase, and drainage was effective.

Randomized Clinical Trial of 14-French (14F) Pigtail Catheters versus 28-32F Chest Tubes in the Management of Patients with Traumatic Hemothorax and Hemopneumothorax

Introduction

Traditional management of traumatic hemothorax/hemopneumothorax (HTX/HPTX) has been insertion of large-bore 32–40 French (Fr) chest tubes (CTs). Retrospective studies have shown 14Fr percutaneous pigtail catheters (PCs) are equally effective as CTs. Our aim was to compare effectiveness between PCs and CTs by performing the first randomized controlled trial (RCT). We hypothesize PCs work equally as well as CTs in management of traumatic HTX/HPTX.

Methods

Prospective RCT comparing 14Fr PCs to 28–32Fr CTs for management of traumatic HTX/HPTX from 07/2015 to 01/2018. We excluded patients requiring emergency tube placement or who refused. Primary outcome was failure rate defined as retained HTX or recurrent PTX requiring additional intervention. Secondary outcomes included initial output (IO), tube days and insertion perception experience (IPE) score on a scale of 1–5 (1 = tolerable experience, 5 = worst experience). Unpaired Student’s t-test, chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were utilized with significance set at P < 0.05.

Results

Forty-three patients were enrolled. Baseline characteristics between PC patients (N = 20) and CT patients (N = 23) were similar. Failure rates (10% PCs vs. 17% CTs, P = 0.49) between cohorts were similar. IO (median, 650 milliliters[ml]; interquartile range[IR], 375–1087; for PCs vs. 400 ml; IR, 240–700; for CTs, P = 0.06), and tube duration was similar, but PC patients reported lower IPE scores (median, 1, “I can tolerate it”; IR, 1–2) than CT patients (median, 3, “It was a bad experience”; IR, 3–4, P = 0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with traumatic HTX/HPTX, 14Fr PCs were equally as effective as 28–32Fr CTs with no significant difference in failure rates. PC patients, however, reported a better insertion experience.

www.ClinicalTrials.gov Registration ID: NCT02553434

Two-Year Experience of 14 French Pigtail Catheters Placed by Procedure-Focused Hospitalists

BACKGROUND

Recent studies show small-bore chest tubes, commonly 14 French pigtail catheters (PCs), are noninferior to large-bore chest tubes for treating various conditions, and they are associated with better patient comfort. The Medical College of Wisconsin implemented a bedside procedure service (BPS) that has been trained in the placement of PCs as an adjunct to its interventional radiology department.

METHODS

The data regarding consults for PC placement was collected by the BPS over a 2-year period. Primary outcomes reviewed were insertion-related complications (IRCs), unsuccessful attempts (UAs), and adverse outcomes (AOs) because the authors believe these represent the safety and effectiveness of the group. It was determined which services consulted the BPS for PC placement, the indications for consults, and a brief review of declined PC consults.

RESULTS

Of the 124 accepted consults, the service had 3 IRCs (2.4%), 2 UAs (1.6%), and 3 AOs (2.4%). A total of 18 consults were declined. The BPS was consulted by 12 services with 8 primary reasons for PC placement.

CONCLUSIONS

At high-volume, tertiary care centers, and with the support of cardiothoracic surgical and interventional radiology services, procedure-focused hospitalists can safely serve as an adjunct service for PC placement in selected hospitalized patients.

Does pigtail catheters relieve pneumothorax?: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pigtail catheter drainage has been usually applied for the treatment of pleural effusion and pneumothorax. Our aim was to investigate the application and efficacy of pigtail catheters for pneumothorax.

METHODS

We carried out a meta-analysis of retro- or pro-spective studies addressing the effect of pigtail catheters for pneumothorax. We presented success rates of pigtail catheter drainage as primary outcomes, and considered the duration of drainage, and complication rates as secondary outcomes. Pooled data were available using the fixed or random effects model. Heterogeneity, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis was based on 16 articles with a total of 1067 patients. Our analyses showed that pooled success rates were 0.77 (0.71-0.82), )furthermore, duration of drainage was 5.61 (3.99-7.23), and complication rates 0.18 (0.09-0.27). Subgroup results according to causes of pneumothorax and patient characteristics were robust and all consistent with overall outcomes.

CONCLUSION

These suggested that pigtail catheter insertion within radiological guidance may provide a safe and effective way for the treatment of pneumothorax. More large-scale and prospective studies were required to determine these findings.

A Prospective Study of 7-Year Experience Using Percutaneous 14-French Pigtail Catheters for Traumatic Hemothorax/Hemopneumothorax at a Level-1 Trauma Center: Size Still Does Not Matter

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of 14-French (14F) pigtail catheters (PCs) compared to 32-40F chest tubes (CTs) in patients with traumatic hemothorax (HTX) and hemopneumothorax (HPTX) is becoming more well known but still lacking. The aim of our study was to analyze our cumulative experience and outcomes with PCs in patients with traumatic HTX/HPTX. We hypothesized that PCs would be as effective as CTs.

METHODS

Using our PC database, we analyzed all trauma patients who required chest drainage for HTX/HPTX from 2008 to 2014. Primary outcomes of interest, comparing PCs to CTs, included initial drainage output in milliliters (mL), tube insertion-related complications, and failure rate. For our statistical analysis, we used the unpaired Student's t test, Chi-square test, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. We defined statistical significance as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

During the 7-year period, 496 trauma patients required chest drainage for traumatic HTX/HPTX: 307 by CTs and 189 by PCs. PC patients were older (52 ± 21 vs. 42 ± 19, P < 0.001), demonstrated a significantly higher occurrence of blunt trauma (86 vs. 55%, P ≤ 0.001), and had tubes placed in a non-emergent fashion (Day 1 [interquartile range (IQR) 1-3 days] for PC placement vs. Day 0 [IQR 0-1 days] for CT placement, P < 0.001). All primary outcomes of interest were similar, except that the initial drainage output for PCs was higher (425 mL [IQR 200-800 mL] vs. 300 mL [IQR 150-500], P < 0.001). Findings for subgroup analysis among emergent and non-emergent PC placement were also similar to CT placement.

CONCLUSION

PCs had similar outcomes to CTs in terms of failure rate and tube insertion-related complications, and the initial drainage output from PCs was not inferior to that of CTs. The usage of PCs was, however, selective. A future multi-center study is needed to provide additional support and information for PC usage in traumatic HTX/HPTX.

Small tube thoracostomy (20-22 Fr) in emergent management of chest trauma

BACKGROUND

The optimal tube size for an emergent thoracostomy for traumatic pneumothorax or hemothorax is unknown. Both small catheter tube thoracostomy and large-bore chest tube thoracostomy have been shown to work for the nonemergent management of patients with traumatic pneumothorax or hemothorax. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of a small chest tube with that of a large tube in emergent thoracostomy due to chest trauma. Our hypothesis was that there would be no difference in clinical outcomes including tube-related complications, the need for additional tube placement, and thoracotomy, with the replacement of large tubes with small tubes.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients with chest trauma requiring tube thoracostomy within the first 2h from arrival at our emergency department over a 7-year period was conducted. Charts were reviewed for demographic data and outcomes including complications and initial drainage output. Small chest tubes (20-22 Fr) were compared with a large tube (28 Fr). Our primary outcome was tube-related complications. Secondary outcomes included additional invasive procedures, such as additional tube insertion and thoracotomy.

RESULTS

There were 124 tube thoracostomies (small: 68, large: 56) performed in 116 patients. There were no significant differences between the small- and large-tube groups with regard to age, gender, injury mechanism, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, and injury severity score. Both groups were similar in the posterior direction of tube insertion, initial drainage output, and the duration of tube insertion. There was no significant difference in the primary outcomes of tube-related complications, including empyema (small: 1/68 vs. large: 1/56; p=1.000) or retained hemothorax (small: 2/68 vs. large: 2/56; p=1.000). Secondary outcomes, including the need for additional tube placement (small: 2/68 vs. large: 4/56; p=0.408) or thoracotomy (small: 2/68 vs. large: 1/56; p=1.000), were also similar.

CONCLUSION

For patients with chest trauma, emergent insertion of 20-22 Fr chest tubes has no difference in the efficacy of drainage, rate of complications, and need for additional invasive procedures compared with a large tube (28 Fr).

The influence of chest tube size and position in primary spontaneous pneumothorax

BACKGROUND

Optimal chest tube position in the pleural cavity is largely unexplored for the treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). We investigated whether type, size and position of chest tubes influenced duration of treatment for PSP.

METHODS

A retrospective follow-up study of all patients admitted with PSP over a 5-year period. Traumatic, iatrogenic and secondary pneumothoraxes were excluded. Gender, age, smoking habits, type and size of chest tube used (pigtail catheter or surgical chest tube) were recorded from the patients' charts. All chest X-rays upon admittance and immediately following chest tube placement were retrieved and re-evaluated for size of pneumothorax (categorized into five groups) and location of the chest tube tip (categorized as upper, middle or lower third of the pleural cavity). All data were analysed in a Cox proportional hazards regression model.

RESULTS

We identified 134 patients with PSP. Baseline characteristics were similar for patients treated with surgical chest tubes and pigtail catheters. Chest tube duration was not significantly influenced by position of the chest tube tip, but was significantly longer in females (P<0.01), patients <30 years (P=0.01), larger pneumothoraxes (P<0.01), use of surgical chest tubes (P=0.03) and a history of previous pneumothorax (P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to common belief and guidelines recommendation the position of a chest tube in the pleural cavity did not significantly influence chest tube duration, but it was significantly longer in patients who were treated with a surgical chest tube.

A pilot study of chest tube versus pigtail catheter drainage of acute hemothorax in swine

BACKGROUND

Evacuation of traumatic hemothorax (HTx) is typically accomplished with large-bore (28-40 Fr) chest tubes, often resulting in patient discomfort. Management of HTx with smaller (14 Fr) pigtail catheters has not been widely adopted because of concerns about tube occlusion and blood evacuation rates. We compared pigtail catheters with chest tubes for the drainage of acute HTx in a swine model.

METHODS

Six Yorkshire cross-bred swine (44-54 kg) were anesthetized, instrumented, and mechanically ventilated. A 32 Fr chest tube was placed in one randomly assigned hemithorax; a 14 Fr pigtail catheter was placed in the other. Each was connected to a chest drainage system at -20 cm H2O suction and clamped. Over 15 minutes, 1,500 mL of arterial blood was withdrawn via femoral artery catheters. Seven hundred fifty milliliters of the withdrawn blood was instilled into each pleural space, and fluid resuscitation with colloid was initiated. The chest drains were then unclamped. Output from each drain was measured every minute for 5 minutes and then every 5 minutes for 40 minutes. The swine were euthanized, and thoracotomies were performed to quantify the volume of blood remaining in each pleural space and to examine the position of each tube.

RESULTS

Blood drainage was more rapid from the chest tube during the first 3 minutes compared with the pigtail catheter (348 ± 109 mL/min vs. 176 ± 53 mL/min), but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.19). Thereafter, the rates of drainage between the two tubes were not substantially different. The chest tube drained a higher total percentage of the blood from the chest (87.3% vs. 70.3%), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

We found no statistically significant difference in the volume of blood drained by a 14 Fr pigtail catheter compared with a 32 Fr chest tube.

Percutaneous pigtail catheter in the treatment of pneumothorax in major burns: the best alternative? Case report and review of literature

Multiple factors place burn patients at a high risk of pneumothorax development. Currently, no specific recommendations for the management of pneumothorax in large total body surface area (TBSA) burn patients exist. We present a case of a major burn patient who developed pneumothorax after central line insertion. After the traditional large bore (24 Fr) chest tube failed to resolve the pneumothorax, the pneumothorax was ultimately managed by a percutaneous placed pigtail catheter thoracostomy placement and resulted in its complete resolution. We will review the current recommendations of pneumothorax treatment and will highlight on the use of pigtail catheters in pneumothorax management in burn patients.

14 French pigtail catheters placed by surgeons to drain blood on trauma patients: is 14-Fr too small?

BACKGROUND

Small 14F pigtail catheters (PCs) have been shown to drain air quite well in patients with traumatic pneumothorax (PTX). But their effectiveness in draining blood in patients with traumatic hemothorax (HTX) or hemopneumothorax (HPTX) is unknown. We hypothesized that 14F PCs can drain blood as well as large-bore 32F to 40F chest tubes. We herein report our early case series experience with PCs in the management of traumatic HTX and HPTX.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on all bedside-inserted PCs in patients with traumatic HTX or HPTX during a 30-month period (July 2009 through December 2011) at our Level I trauma center. We then compared our PC prospective data with our trauma registry-derived retrospective chest tube data (January 2008 through December 2010) at our center. Our primary outcome of interest was the initial drainage output. Our secondary outcomes were tube duration, insertion-related complications, and failure rate. For our statistical analysis, we used the unpaired Student's t-test, χ test, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test; we defined significance by a value of p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients received PCs, and 191 received chest tubes. Our PC group had a higher rate of blunt mechanism injuries than our chest tube group did (83 vs. 62%; p = 0.01). The mean initial output was similar between our PC group (560 ± 81 mL) and our chest tube group (426 ± 37 mL) (p = 0.13). In the PC group, the tube was inserted later (median, Day 1; interquartile range, Days 0-3) than the tube inserted in our chest tube group (median, Day 0; interquartile range, Days 0-0) (p < 0.001). Tube duration, rate of insertion-related complications, and failure rate were all similar.

CONCLUSION

In our early experience, 14F PCs seemed to drain blood as well as large-bore chest tubes based on initial drainage output and other outcomes studied. In this early phase, we were being selective in inserting PCs in only stable blunt trauma patients, and PCs were inserted at a later day from the time of the initial evaluation. In the future, we will need a larger sample size and possibly a well-designed prospective study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level V.

Emergencies in pleural diseases

A parapneumonic effusion should be drained if it is large (≥ 1/2 of the hemithorax), loculated, frank pus is obtained, if the fluid is non-purulent fluid but has a low pH (< 7.20) or if the culture is positive. Instillation of fibrinolytics and DNase thorough the chest catheter in locutated effusions and empyemas is currently recommended. Management of spontaneous pneumothorax is fundamentally influenced by the patient's symptoms. Insertion of a chest catheter is mandatory if there is significant dyspnea, hemodynamic instability or large pneumothoraces (≥ 2 cm). Pleural ultrasonography confirms the presence of air or fluid in the pleural space and serves to guide any pleural procedure (e.g., thoracentesis, chest tubes). The use of small-bore 12F catheters inserted via the percutaneous Seldinger technique under ultrasonography guidance is a safe and effective procedure in complicated parapneumonic effusions/empyema and most pneumothoraces.