Back to Search Start Over

Ambulatory management of secondary spontaneous pneumothorax: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors :
Walker SP
Keenan E
Bintcliffe O
Stanton AE
Roberts M
Pepperell J
Fairbairn I
McKeown E
Goldring J
Maddekar N
Walters J
West A
Bhatta A
Knight M
Mercer R
Hallifax R
White P
Miller RF
Rahman NM
Maskell NA
Source :
The European respiratory journal [Eur Respir J] 2021 Jun 24; Vol. 57 (6). Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Jun 24 (Print Publication: 2021).
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

Secondary spontaneous pneumothorax (SSP) is traditionally managed with an intercostal chest tube attached to an underwater seal. We investigated whether use of a one-way flutter valve shortened patients' length of stay (LoS).This open-label randomised controlled trial enrolled patients presenting with SSP and randomised to either a chest tube and underwater seal (standard care: SC) or ambulatory care (AC) with a flutter valve. The type of flutter valve used depended on whether at randomisation the patient already had a chest tube in place: in those without a chest tube a pleural vent (PV) was used; in those with a chest tube in situ , an Atrium Pneumostat (AP) valve was attached. The primary end-point was LoS.Between March 2017 and March 2020, 41 patients underwent randomisation: 20 to SC and 21 to AC (13=PV, 8=AP). There was no difference in LoS in the first 30 days following treatment intervention: AC (median=6 days, IQR 14.5) and SC (median=6 days, IQR 13.3). In patients treated with PV there was a high rate of early treatment failure (6/13; 46%), compared to patients receiving SC (3/20; 15%) (p=0.11) Patients treated with AP had no (0/8 0%) early treatment failures and a median LoS of 1.5 days (IQR 23.8).There was no difference in LoS between ambulatory and standard care. Pleural Vents had high rates of treatment failure and should not be used in SSP. Atrium Pneumostats are a safer alternative, with a trend towards lower LoS.<br />Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: S.P. Walker reports grants from Rocket Medical, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: E. Keenan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: O. Bintcliffe has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A.E. Stanton has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Roberts has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Pepperell has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: I. Fairbairn has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: E. McKeown has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Goldring has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N. Maddekar has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Walters has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. West has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Bhatta has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Knight has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Mercer has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Hallifax has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. White has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.F. Miller reports personal fees for lectures from Gilead, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: N.M. Rahman reports personal fees for consultancy from Rocket Medical, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: N.A. Maskell reports grants from Rocket Medical, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from BD Carefusion and Cook Medical, outside the submitted work.<br /> (Copyright ©ERS 2021. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1399-3003
Volume :
57
Issue :
6
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
The European respiratory journal
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
33334938
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.03375-2020