Talc pleurodesis through indwelling pleural catheters for malignant pleural effusions: retrospective case series of a novel clinical pathway

Usefulness of thoracic ultrasound in the assessment of removal of indwelling pleural catheter in patients with malignant pleural effusion

INTRODUCTION

There are no defined criteria for deciding to remove a non-functioning indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) when lung re-expansion on chest X-ray is incomplete. Chest computed tomography (chest CT) is usually used. The objective of this work is to validate the usefulness of chest ultrasound performed by a pulmonologist and by a radiologist compared to chest CT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective, descriptive, multidisciplinary and multicenter study including patients with malignant pleural effusion and non-functioning IPC without lung reexpansion. Decisions made on the basis of chest ultrasound performed by a pulmonologist, and performed by a radiologist, were compared with chest CT as the gold standard.

RESULTS

18 patients were analyzed, all of them underwent ultrasound by a pulmonologist and chest CT and in 11 of them also ultrasound by a radiologist. The ultrasound performed by the pulmonologist presents a sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 100%, PPV 100% and NPV 66% in the decision of the correct removal of the IPC. The concordance of both ultrasounds (pulmonologist and radiologist) was 100%, with a kappa index of 1. The 4 discordant cases were those in which the IPC was not located on the ultrasound.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic ultrasound performed by an expert pulmonologist is a valid and simple tool to determine spontaneous pleurodesis and remove a non-functioning IPC, which would make it possible to avoid chest CT in those cases in which lung reexpansion is observed with ultrasonography.

Australasian Malignant PLeural Effusion (AMPLE)-3 trial: study protocol for a multi-centre randomised study comparing indwelling pleural catheter (±talc pleurodesis) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for management of malignant pleural effusion

Introduction

Malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) are common. MPE causes significant breathlessness and impairs quality of life. Indwelling pleural catheters (IPC) allow ambulatory drainage and reduce hospital days and re-intervention rates when compared to standard talc slurry pleurodesis. Daily drainage accelerates pleurodesis, and talc instillation via the IPC has been proven feasible and safe. Surgical pleurodesis via video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is considered a one-off intervention for MPE and is often recommended to patients who are fit for surgery. The AMPLE-3 trial is the first randomised trial to compare IPC (±talc pleurodesis) and VATS pleurodesis in those who are fit for surgery.

Methods and analysis

A multi-centre, open-labelled randomised trial of patients with symptomatic MPE, expected survival of ≥ 6 months and good performance status randomised 1:1 to either IPC or VATS pleurodesis. Participant randomisation will be minimised for (i) cancer type (mesothelioma vs non-mesothelioma); (ii) previous pleurodesis (vs not); and (iii) trapped lung, if known (vs not). Primary outcome is the need for further ipsilateral pleural interventions over 12 months or until death, if sooner. Secondary outcomes include days in hospital, quality of life (QoL) measures, physical activity levels, safety profile, health economics, adverse events, and survival. The trial will recruit 158 participants who will be followed up for 12 months.

Ethics and dissemination

Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group (HREC) has approved the study (reference: RGS356). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.

Discussion

Both IPC and VATS are commonly used procedures for MPE. The AMPLE-3 trial will provide data to help define the merits and shortcomings of these procedures and inform future clinical care algorithms.

Trial registration

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12618001013257. Registered on 18 June 2018.

Protocol version: Version 3.00/4.02.19

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06405-7.

Management of Malignant Pleural Effusion: Where Are We Now?

Pleural malignancies are among the most common causes of pleural disease and form the basis of our daily pleural practice. There has been significant research and increase in both diagnostic and therapeutic management of malignant pleural diseases in the last decade. Good-quality data have led to a paradigm shift in the management options of pleural malignancies, and indwelling pleural catheter is now recommended and widely used as first-line intervention. Several trials compared different treatment modalities for pleural malignancies and continue to emphasize the need to reduce hospital length of stay and unnecessary pleural intervention, and the importance of patient choice in clinical decision making. This practical review aims to summarize the current knowledge for the management of pleural malignancies, and the understanding of the steps that we still have to climb to optimize management and reduce morbidity.

Diagnosis and Management of Malignant Pleural Effusion: A Decade in Review

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a common complication of thoracic and extrathoracic malignancies and is associated with high mortality. Treatment is mainly palliative, with symptomatic management achieved via effusion drainage and pleurodesis. Pleurodesis may be hastened by administering a sclerosing agent through a thoracostomy tube, thoracoscopy, or an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC). Over the last decade, several randomized controlled studies shaped the current management of MPE in favor of an outpatient-based approach with a notable increase in IPC usage. Patient preferences remain essential in choosing optimal therapy, especially when the lung is expandable. In this article, we reviewed the last 10 to 15 years of MPE literature with a particular focus on the diagnosis and evolving management.

Association between Tunneled Pleural Catheter Use and Infection in Patients Immunosuppressed from Antineoplastic Therapy. A Multicenter Study

Rationale: Patients with malignant or paramalignant pleural effusions (MPEs or PMPEs) may have tunneled pleural catheter (TPC) management withheld because of infection concerns from immunosuppression associated with antineoplastic therapy.Objectives: To determine the rate of infections related to TPC use and to determine the relationship to antineoplastic therapy, immune system competency, and overall survival (OS).Methods: We performed an international, multiinstitutional study of patients with MPEs or PMPEs undergoing TPC management from 2008 to 2016. Patients were stratified by whether or not they underwent antineoplastic therapy and/or whether or not they were immunocompromised. Cumulative incidence functions and multivariable competing risk regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of TPC-related infection. Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling were performed to examine for independent effects on OS.Results: A total of 1,408 TPCs were placed in 1,318 patients. Patients had a high frequency of overlap between antineoplastic therapy and an immunocompromised state (75-83%). No difference in the overall (6-7%), deep pleural (3-5%), or superficial (3-4%) TPC-related infection rates between subsets of patients stratified by antineoplastic therapy or immune status was observed. The median time to infection was 41 (interquartile range, 19-87) days after TPC insertion. Multivariable competing risk analyses demonstrated that longer TPC duration was associated with a higher risk of TPC-related infection (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.06; P = 0.028). Cox proportional hazards analysis showed antineoplastic therapy was associated with better OS (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73-0.97; P = 0.015).Conclusions: The risk of TPC-related infection does not appear to be increased by antineoplastic therapy use or an immunocompromised state. The overall rates of infection are low and comparable with those of immunocompetent patients with no relevant antineoplastic therapy. These results support TPC palliation for MPE or PMPEs regardless of plans for antineoplastic therapy.

Advances in pleural infection and malignancy

Pleural infection and malignancy are among the most common causes of pleural disease and form the mainstay of pleural practice. There has been significant research and increase in scientific understanding in these areas in the past decade. With regard to pleural infection, the rising incidence remains worrying. An increased awareness allowing earlier diagnosis, earlier escalation of therapy and the use of validated risk stratification measures may improve outcomes. In pleural malignancy, research has enabled clinicians to streamline patient pathways with focus on reducing time to diagnosis, definitive management of malignant pleural effusion and achieving these with the minimum number of pleural interventions. Trials comparing treatment modalities of malignant pleural effusion continue to highlight the importance of patient choice in clinical decision-making. This article aims to summarise some of the most recent literature informing current practice in these two areas.

Outpatient talc administration via indwelling pleural catheters for malignant effusions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Malignant pleural effusion is a common cause of breathlessness and signifies advanced disease. Common options for definitive pleural intervention include insertion of an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) or talc pleurodesis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Administration of graded talc through an IPC offers an increased chance of pleurodesis compared with IPC drainage alone and is not associated with a significant risk of adverse events.

SUMMARY

In patients where an ambulatory treatment pathway is preferred, the increased chance of pleurodesis with talc administration via IPC can result in a faster time to device removal and may be associated with better quality of life and symptom scores.

Role of early definitive management for newly diagnosed malignant pleural effusion related to lung cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The advent of effective anti-cancer therapy has brought about uncertainty on the benefit of early definitive measures for newly diagnosed MPE from lung cancer. This study aims to investigate the outcomes of MPE in this setting.

METHODS

Lung cancer patients with MPE at first presentation to a tertiary care hospital were followed up till death or censored from 2011 to 2018. Early MPE control measures included chemical pleurodesis or IPC before or shortly after oncological treatment. Predictors of time to MPE re-intervention were identified with Cox proportional hazard analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 509 records screened, 233 subjects were eligible. One hundred and twenty-seven subjects received oral targeted therapy as first-line treatment and 34 (26.8%) underwent early definitive MPE control measures. Early MPE control measures in addition to targeted therapy, as compared to targeted therapy alone, significantly reduced the subsequent need of MPE re-intervention (23.5% vs 53.8%, P = 0.002). Similar benefits from MPE control measures were found in groups receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy or best supportive care (0% vs 52%, P = 0.003; 18% vs 56.7%, P = 0.024, respectively). In the group with targetable mutations, both early MPE control measures (HR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.53, P < 0.001) and the use of targeted therapy (HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.10-0.46, P < 0.001) were independently associated with longer time to MPE re-interventions.

CONCLUSION

Early MPE control measures in lung cancer has additional benefits on reducing the need and prolonging the time to MPE re-intervention, independent of anti-cancer therapies.

Contemporary approach to the patient with malignant pleural effusion complicating lung cancer

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) occurring in the patient with lung cancer can have profound prognostic and management implications. If clinically relevant, such an effusion first needs to be confirmed as malignant and then, in the majority of lung cancer patients, it will require a pleural intervention to relieve symptoms related to fluid accumulation. The field of pleural diseases in general, and pleural malignancy in particular, has undergone dynamic changes in recent years as the evidence base informing practice has grown by leaps and bounds. Both the diagnosis and management of MPE are dynamically changing disciplines in thoracic medicine. As commonly happens, emerging data have generated just as many questions as they have answered. The aim of the present review is to summarize the current knowledge about MPE resulting from lung cancer in a manner that is accessible to clinicians across medical specialties.

Malignant Pleural Effusion: Still a Long Way to Go

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural effusion, which is a common clinical problem in patients with cancer, may be due to both primary thoracic tumours or to a metastatic spread in the chest and constitutes the first sign of disease in approximately 10% of patients. Almost all cancers can potentially produce a pleural effusion. The presence of malignant tumour cells in the pleural fluid is generally indicative of advanced disease and is associated with high morbidity and mortality with reduced therapeutic options. Dyspnoea during mild physical activity or at rest is generally the typical sign of restrictive respiratory failure.

METHODS

This is a systematic review of all the main articles in the English language on the topic of malignant pleural effusion and reported by the Pubmed database from 1959 to 2018. I reviewed the literature and guidelines with the aims to focus on what is known and on future pathways to follow the diagnosis and treatment of malignant pleural effusions.

RESULTS

The main goal of palliation of a malignant pleural effusion is a quick improvement in dyspnoea, while thoracentesis under ultrasound guidance is the treatment of choice for patients with a limited life expectancy or who are not candidates for more invasive procedures such as drainage using an indwelling small pleural catheter, chemical pleurodesis with sclerosing agents, pleurectomy or pleuro-peritoneal shunt.

CONCLUSION

Despite progress in therapeutic options, the prognosis remains severe, and the average survival is 4-9 months from the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion. Moreover, mortality is higher for patients with malignant pleural effusion compared with those with metastatic cancer but no malignant pleural effusion. Therefore, the prognosis of these patients primarily depends on the underlying disease and the extension of a primary tumour. This review focuses on the most relevant updates in the management of malignant pleural effusion.

Recent developments in pleurodesis for malignant pleural disease

OBJECTIVE

Metastatic pleural effusion (MPE) is one of the most frequent causes of pleural effusion. The aims of the therapeutic management are palliation of symptoms and improvement in patient's quality of life. The first step is a therapeutic thoracentesis. In case of a recurrent MPE, pleural maneuvers can be used to manage symptoms based on either ambulatory pleural drainage or pleurodesis to prevent fluid accumulation. The aim of this review is to describe recent advances, according to the best available evidence, in the field of pleurodesis for the management of MPE.

DATA SOURCE AND STUDY SELECTION

Three different searches of the most clinically relevant articles and up-to-date results in the field of pleurodesis for the management of MPE were performed using PubMed. Different indexing terms and time restriction were chosen. From these PubMed searches, 322 articles were respectively found. After cross-checking these three lists and the selection of articles published after January 2010 specially dedicated to the management of MPE by pleurodesis, the abstracts of 106 articles were extracted to feed the corpus of this review.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Treatment approaches of recurrent MPE should take into account multiple factors in particular patient's life expectancy and preference. If talc is the best sclerosing agent alone or in combination with indwelling pleural catheter which is a promising strategy, the pathophysiology of MPE has to be revisited in order to propose a personalized management targeting intrapleural key molecules involved in the genesis of malignant process.

Making cold malignant pleural effusions hot: driving novel immunotherapies

Malignant pleural effusions, arising from either primary mesotheliomas or secondary malignancies, heralds advanced disease and poor prognosis. Current treatments, including therapeutic thoracentesis and tube thoracostomy, are largely palliative. The immunosuppressive environment within the pleural cavity includes myeloid derived suppressor cells, T-regulatory cells, and dysfunctional T cells. The advent of effective immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors and adoptive cell therapies for lung cancer and other malignancies suggests a renewed examination of local and systemic therapies for this malady. Prior strategies reporting remarkable success, including instillation of the cytokine interleukin-2, perhaps coupled with checkpoint inhibitors, should be further evaluated in the modern era.

Contemporary best practice in the management of malignant pleural effusion

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) affects more than 1 million people globally. There is a dearth of evidence on the therapeutic approach to MPE, and not surprisingly a high degree of variability in the management thereof. We aimed to provide practicing clinicians with an overview of the current evidence on the management of MPE, preferentially focusing on studies that report patient-related outcomes rather than pleurodesis alone, and to provide guidance on how to approach individual cases. A pleural intervention for MPE will perforce be palliative in nature. A therapeutic thoracentesis provides immediate relief for most. It can be repeated, especially in patients with a slow rate of recurrence and a short anticipated survival. Definitive interventions, individualized according the patient's wishes, performance status, prognosis and other considerations (including the ability of the lung to expand) should be offered to the remainder of patients. Chemical pleurodesis (achieved via intercostal drain or pleuroscopy) and indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) have equal impact on patient-based outcomes, although patients treated with IPC spend less time in hospital and have less need for repeat pleural drainage interventions. Talc slurry via IPC is an attractive recently validated option for patients who do not have a nonexpandable lung.

Management of Malignant Lung Entrapment, the Oncothorax

Pleural metastasis is a common occurrence in up to 30% of patients with metastatic cancer. When lung entrapment and loculation of fluid occur, treatment is more difficult and we have named this condition "oncothorax." The malignant adhesions that entrap the lung in an oncothorax are not typically amenable to surgical decortication. The standard approach for managing these patients is to place an indwelling catheter. Other options may include pleurectomy and decortication, intrapleural hyperthermic chemoperfusion, and intrapleural photodynamic therapy. However, these procedures should be provided selectively depending on patient performance status, extent of metastatic disease, and level of experience.

Indwelling Pleural Catheters for Patients with Hematologic Malignancies. A 14-Year, Single-Center Experience

RATIONALE

Placement of an indwelling pleural catheter is an established modality for symptom relief and pleurodesis in the treatment of malignant pleural effusion. Concerns remain regarding possible infectious complications, risk of hemorrhage, and the rate of pleurodesis with the use of pleural catheters in the treatment of hematologic malignancies.

OBJECTIVES

The goals of our study were: (1) to evaluate the safety and cumulative incidence of pleurodesis with indwelling pleural catheters for patients with hematologic malignancies, and (2) to evaluate overall survival of this cohort of patients with pleural effusions.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 172 patients with a hematologic malignancy who underwent placement of an indwelling pleural catheter between September 1997 and August 2011 at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. A competing risk model analysis was used for complications and pleurodesis. Analysis was based on each patient's first intrapleural catheter.

RESULTS

There were 172 patients with lymphoma (58%), acute (16%) or chronic leukemia (16%), or multiple myeloma (10%). The effusions were characterized as malignant (85.5%), infectious (4.1%), volume overload (4.7%), or therapy-related (4.7%). Chylothorax was found in 20.1%. Pleural biopsies were obtained from 13 patients. The cumulative incidence of all complications was 13.6%, and the cumulative incidence of all significant catheter-related complications was 9.5%. The incidence of empyema was 2.9%, and major bleeding (requiring transfusion or intervention) was 1.7%. Thirty-day procedure-associated mortality was 0.6%. The cumulative incidence of pleurodesis at 180 days was 50%, with a median time to pleurodesis of 81 days for the entire cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Indwelling pleural catheters appear to be safe for patients with hematologic malignancies. Complications and the cumulative incidence of pleurodesis are comparable to those reported for patients with solid organ malignancies.

Outpatient Talc Administration by Indwelling Pleural Catheter for Malignant Effusion

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural effusion affects more than 750,000 persons each year across Europe and the United States. Pleurodesis with the administration of talc in hospitalized patients is the most common treatment, but indwelling pleural catheters placed for drainage offer an ambulatory alternative. We examined whether talc administered through an indwelling pleural catheter was more effective at inducing pleurodesis than the use of an indwelling pleural catheter alone.

METHODS

Over a period of 4 years, we recruited patients with malignant pleural effusion at 18 centers in the United Kingdom. After the insertion of an indwelling pleural catheter, patients underwent drainage regularly on an outpatient basis. If there was no evidence of substantial lung entrapment (nonexpandable lung, in which lung expansion and pleural apposition are not possible because of visceral fibrosis or bronchial obstruction) at 10 days, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 4 g of talc slurry or placebo through the indwelling pleural catheter on an outpatient basis. Talc or placebo was administered on a single-blind basis. Follow-up lasted for 70 days. The primary outcome was successful pleurodesis at day 35 after randomization.

RESULTS

The target of 154 patients undergoing randomization was reached after 584 patients were approached. At day 35, a total of 30 of 69 patients (43%) in the talc group had successful pleurodesis, as compared with 16 of 70 (23%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 2.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.23 to 3.92; P=0.008). No significant between-group differences in effusion size and complexity, number of inpatient days, mortality, or number of adverse events were identified. No significant excess of blockages of the indwelling pleural catheter was noted in the talc group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients without substantial lung entrapment, the outpatient administration of talc through an indwelling pleural catheter for the treatment of malignant pleural effusion resulted in a significantly higher chance of pleurodesis at 35 days than an indwelling catheter alone, with no deleterious effects. (Funded by Becton Dickinson; EudraCT number, 2012-000599-40 .).

Surgical and non-surgical management of malignant pleural effusions

INTRODUCTION

Optimal management of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is important in the care of patients with advanced cancer. Surgical (especially video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)) and non-surgical strategies are available. Clinicians should be aware of the evidence supporting the use of different modalities to guide treatment choice. Areas covered: This review covers published evidence of the advantages and disadvantages of VATS and non-surgical alternatives for MPE management. Expert commentary: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are needed to define the roles and benefits of VATS as existing literature is often flawed by selection bias. Three RCTs have failed to show benefits of VATS talc poudrage over bedside talc pleurodesis. VATS-pleurectomy offered no survival advantage in a RCT of mesothelioma patients. Modification of VATS techniques has reduced the invasiveness and associated risks. Future trials should compare VATS with contemporary, non-surgical approaches (especially combined Indwelling Pleural Catheter (IPC) and chemical pleurodesis therapy). Individualized management for different subgroups of MPE patients should be a long-term research goal. Studies are needed on better patient selection, and adjunct non-invasive, supportive (e.g. nutrition and exercise) therapies.

A single institution experience for the management of recurrent pleural effusions with tunneled pleural catheter and its evolution

BACKGROUND

Indwelling tunneled pleural catheters (TPCs) are increasingly being used to treat recurrent pleural effusions. There is also an increased interest in early pleurodesis in order to prevent infectious complications. We studied the time to removal and other outcomes for all the TPCs placed at our institution.

METHODS

After institutional review board approval, records of patients who had had a TPC placed between July 2009 and June 2016 were reviewed; the catheters were placed in an endoscopy suite or during pleuroscopy with or without a sclerosant. The catheters were drained daily or less frequently and were removed after three drainages of less than 50 ml.

RESULTS

During the study period 193 TPCs were placed. Of these 45 (23%) were placed for benign diseases. The commonest malignancy was lung cancer 70 (36%). Drainage 2-3 times a week without a sclerosant ( n = 100) lead to pleurodesis at 57 ± 78 days, while daily drainage after TPC + pleuroscopy + talc ( n = 41) achieved the same result in 14 ± 8 days ( p < 0.001). TPC + talc + daily protocol achieved pleurodesis in 19 ± 7 days, TPC + rapid protocol achieved the same result in 28 ± 19 days ( p = 0.013). The TPCs + sclerosant had an odds ratio of 6.01 (95% confidence interval: 2.1-17.2) of having a complication versus TPC without sclerosant.

CONCLUSIONS

It is clear that TPCs when placed with a sclerosant had a significantly shorter dwell time; However, they were associated with higher odds of complications. One must be aware of these possibilities when offering what is essentially a palliative therapy.

Management of malignant pleural effusion: challenges and solutions

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a sign of advanced cancer and is associated with significant symptom burden and mortality. To date, management has been palliative in nature with a focus on draining the pleural space, with therapies aimed at preventing recurrence or providing intermittent drainage through indwelling catheters. Given that patients with MPEs are heterogeneous with respect to their cancer type and response to systemic therapy, functional status, and pleural milieu, response to MPE therapy is also heterogeneous and difficult to predict. Furthermore, the impact of therapies on important patient outcomes has only recently been evaluated consistently in clinical trials and cohort studies. In this review, we examine patient outcomes that have been studied to date, address the question of which are most important for managing patients, and review the literature related to the expected value for money (cost-effectiveness) of indwelling pleural catheters relative to traditionally recommended approaches.

Advanced medical interventions in pleural disease

The burden of a number of pleural diseases continues to increase internationally. Although many pleural procedures have historically been the domain of interventional radiologists or thoracic surgeons, in recent years, there has been a marked expansion in the techniques available to the pulmonologist. This has been due in part to both technological advancements and a greater recognition that pleural disease is an important subspecialty of respiratory medicine. This article summarises the important literature relating to a number of advanced pleural interventions, including medical thoracoscopy, the insertion and use of indwelling pleural catheters, pleural manometry, point-of-care thoracic ultrasound, and image-guided closed pleural biopsy. We also aim to inform the reader regarding the latest updates to more established procedures such as chemical pleurodesis, thoracentesis and the management of chest drains, drawing on contemporary data from recent randomised trials. Finally, we shall look to explore the challenges faced by those practicing pleural medicine, especially relating to training, as well as possible future directions for the use and expansion of advanced medical interventions in pleural disease.

Comparing approaches to the management of malignant pleural effusions

INTRODUCTION

Management of symptomatic malignant pleural effusions is becoming more complex due to the range of treatment options, which include therapeutic thoracenteses, thoracoscopic talc pleurodesis, bedside pleurodesis with talc or other sclerosing agents via small-bore chest catheters, indwelling pleural catheters, surgery, or a combination of some of these procedures. Areas covered: Recent advances for the expanding range of treatment options in malignant pleural effusions are summarized, according to the best available evidence. Expert commentary: Selection of a treatment approach in malignant pleural effusions should take into account patient preferences and performance status, tumor type, predicted prognosis, presence of a non-expandable lung, and local experience or availability. The role of pleurodesis has decreased with the advent of indwelling pleural catheters, which provide a high degree of symptomatic relief on an outpatient basis and, therefore, are being positioned as a first choice therapy in many centers. Talc poudrage pleurodesis should probably be reserved for those situations in which pleural tumor invasion is discovered during diagnostic thoracoscopy. Ongoing randomized controlled trials will offer solid evidence on which of the available palliative approaches should be selected for each particular patient.

Pleural procedures in the management of malignant effusions

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is common in clinical practice, and despite the existence of studies to guide clinical decisions, it often poses diagnostic and therapeutic dilemmas. Once it is diagnosed, median survival does not usually exceed 6 months. The management of these patients focuses on symptom relief since no treatments have been shown to increase survival to date. Conversely, poor management can shorten survival. The approach must be multidisciplinary and allow for individualized care. Initial diagnostic procedures should be minimally invasive and, according to the results and other factors, procedures of increasing complexity will be selecting. Likewise, the treatment of MPEs should be individualized according to factors such as type of tumor, patient functional status, means available, benefits of each procedure, or life expectancy. Currently, treatment seems to tend toward less interventional approaches, in which patients can be managed on an outpatient basis, thus minimizing both the discomfort that more aggressive approaches involve and the costs of care associated with this disease. This article reviews the pleural procedures employed in the management of MPEs with special emphasis on the indication for each one, its usefulness, benefits, and complications.

Indwelling Pleural Catheters: A Clinical Option in Trapped Lung

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) symptoms have a real impact on quality of life. Surgical approach through video-assisted thoracic surgery provides a first step in palliation. In patients unfit for general anesthesia, awake pleuroscopy represents an alternative. Sclerosing agents can be administered at the bedside through a chest tube. Ideal treatment of MPE should include adequate long-term symptom relief, minimize hospitalization, and reduce adverse effects. Indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) allows outpatient management of MPE through periodic ambulatory fluid drainage. IPC offers advantages over pleurodesis in patients with poor functional status who cannot tolerate pleurodesis or in patients with trapped lungs.

OPTIMUM: a protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing Out Patient Talc slurry via Indwelling pleural catheter for Malignant pleural effusion vs Usual inpatient Management

INTRODUCTION

The development of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) results in disabling breathlessness, pain and reduced physical capability with treatment a palliative strategy. Ambulatory management of MPE has the potential to improve quality of life (QoL). The OPTIMUM trial is designed to determine whether full outpatient management of MPE with an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) and pleurodesis improves QoL compared with traditional inpatient care with a chest drain and talc pleurodesis. OPTIMUM is currently open for any centres interested in collaborating in this study.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

OPTIMUM is a multicentre non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Patients with a diagnosis of MPE will be identified and screened for eligibility. Consenting participants will be randomised 1:1 either to an outpatient ambulatory pathway using IPCs and talc pleurodesis or standard inpatient treatment with chest drain and talc pleurodesis as per British Thoracic Society guidelines. The primary outcome measure is global health-related QoL at 30 days measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures include breathlessness and pain measured using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale and health-related QoL at 60 and 90 days. A sample size of 142 patients is needed to demonstrate a clinically significant difference of 8 points in global health status at 30 days, for an 80% power and a 5% significance level.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the NRES Committee South East Coast-Brighton and Sussex (reference 15/LO/1018). The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

UKCRN19615 and ISRCTN15503522; Pre-results.

Safety of indwelling pleural catheter use in patients undergoing chemotherapy: a five-year retrospective evaluation

Background

Indwelling pleural catheters (IPC) are increasingly becoming a first-line treatment in the management of malignant pleural effusions. Ambulatory management using IPC are increasingly used in this patient group whilst they are receiving concurrent chemotherapy. There are currently no prospective trials examining IPC safety in chemotherapy. This study’s objective is to determine if IPC insertion is safe in patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent IPC insertion for malignant pleural effusion at our trust from September 2010 to December 2014. Data was collected on IPC insertion and removal, tumour type, systemic chemotherapy, pleural infection and other complications.

Results

One hundred four patients were identified, 43 in chemotherapy group and 61 in non-chemotherapy group. The incidence of pleural infection in chemotherapy group vs non-chemotherapy group, 4 (9.3 %) vs 3 (4.9 %) respectively, was not statistically different (Fisher’s exact p = 0.311). There was no significant difference in six-month infection-free duration from the date of IPC insertion (log rank p = 0.394). Overall six-month mortality in chemotherapy group was significantly lower than in non-chemotherapy group (log rank p = 0.007).

Conclusions

This is the second largest retrospective case–control series that concludes systemic chemotherapy is safe in patients with IPC undergoing chemotherapy.

Management of malignant pleural effusions in patients with trapped lung with indwelling pleural catheter: how to do it

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a well-known sign of an end-stage cancer and affects the quality of life of these patients. The primary goal in the management of MPE should be a soothing treatment with the palliation of symptoms. Pleurodesis may be accomplished with chemical irritation of the pleura and represents the commonest treatment of MPE with palliative intent. Pleurodesis may be achieved through a chest drainage placement or a video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) procedure. The uniportal VATS talc poudrage is considered the gold standard of care for fit patients, while talc slurry (through the chest drainage) is reserved to those patients with important comorbidities not tolerating a surgical procedure. However, if the lung remains trapped after fluid evacuation or if the daily fluid output after chest tube insertion is major than 300 mL/day, the talc pleurodesis is likely to fail. Therefore, in those patients who are unfit for pleurodesis (low performance status or comorbidity), or with a recurrent MPE after chemical pleurodesis, or with trapped lung, the outpatient intermittent drainage through a subcutaneous tunnelled indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) effectively relieved dyspnoea without complications. The treatment of recurrent MPE with an IPC reduces symptoms and improves quality of life in patients with end-stage cancers. The complication rate is low; therefore, the IPC can be easily managed at home. The IPC is safe, easy to place and effective for the palliation of MPE. It could help the clinical need of the thoracic surgeons and the other members of a multidisciplinary cancer team.

Outpatient thoracoscopy: safety and practical considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Medical thoracoscopy, also known as pleuroscopy, has been utilized by chest physicians for more than a century. Despite this, it has only recently re-emerged as an important tool for interventional pulmonologists to diagnose and treat pleural diseases. The purpose of this review is to critically assess the recent literature related to medical thoracoscopy, specifically as it pertains to its safety and feasibility as an outpatient procedure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent data have reaffirmed the clinical utility of medical thoracoscopy and suggest that it can be safely performed in an outpatient setting. A single-center study of 51 patients published in the past year described both the feasibility and safety of outpatient medical thoracoscopy. This study highlights the notion that the majority of patients do not require hospital admission after a routine diagnostic thoracoscopy in the absence of talc poudrage. Another study this year described the successful use of chest physician-directed ultrasound-guided cutting needle biopsy when medical thoracoscopy was not technically possible.

SUMMARY

The contribution of medical thoracoscopy in the diagnosis and management of pleural diseases is increasingly recognized. Evidence supports the routine practice of medical thoracoscopy on an outpatient basis in experienced centers.

Complications of indwelling pleural catheter use and their management

The growing utilisation of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) has put forward a new era in the management of recurrent symptomatic pleural effusions. IPC use is safe compared to talc pleurodesis, though complications can occur. Pleural infection affects <5% of patients, and is usually responsive to antibiotic treatment without requiring catheter removal or surgery. Pleural loculations develop over time, limiting drainage in 10% of patients, which can be improved with intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy. Catheter tract metastasis can occur with most tumours but is more common in mesothelioma. The metastases usually respond to analgaesics and/or external radiotherapy. Long-term intermittent drainage of exudative effusions or chylothorax can potentially lead to loss of nutrients, though no data exist on any clinical impact. Fibrin clots within the catheter lumen can result in blockage. Chest pain following IPC insertion is often mild, and adjustments in analgaesics and drainage practice are usually all that are required. As clinical experience with the use of IPC accumulates, the profile and natural course of complications are increasingly described. We aim to summarise the available literature on IPC-related complications and the evidence to support specific strategies.

Pleural controversies: indwelling pleural catheter vs. pleurodesis for malignant pleural effusions

Malignant pleural effusions (MPE) are frequent consequences of malignant disease and significantly impair the quality of life (QoL) of patients. There are two main options for the palliation of MPE-related symptoms: obliterating the pleural space by pleurodesis to prevent further fluid reaccumulation, or chronically draining the pleural fluid with an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC). There is controversy as to which approach is superior each having advantages and drawbacks. Pleurodesis offers a higher chance of rapid resolution of the pleural effusion with an intervention that is time limited but at the expense of a more invasive procedure, the need for a hospital stay and a higher need for repeat procedures. IPC offers an outpatient solution which is less invasive but at the cost of prolonged catheter drainages and care in a significant portion of patients who will not achieve pleurodesis. Impact on QoL, symptom relief and costs do not appear to be significantly different between the two options. Treatment of MPE should be tailored to the patient's functional status, comorbidities, prognosis and personal preferences as well as local expertise. Hybrid approaches using pleurodesis techniques and IPC concomitantly may come into play in the near future to further improve patient care.