Sensitivity of chest x-ray for visualisation of one brand of indwelling pleural catheter

IF 0.7 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Imaging Pub Date : 2023-09-09 DOI:10.1183/13993003.congress-2023.pa4006
Sophie Edgell, John Harrington, Vineeth George
{"title":"Sensitivity of chest x-ray for visualisation of one brand of indwelling pleural catheter","authors":"Sophie Edgell, John Harrington, Vineeth George","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2023.pa4006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<b>Introduction:</b> Correct placement of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) is often confirmed on chest x-ray (CXR). Recent anecdotal reports suggest a brand of IPCs (Rocket) may be difficult to visualise due to a thinner barium stripe. This study aims to evaluate the sensitivity of CXR for detecting these IPCs. <b>Methods:</b> Medical records of patients who underwent IPC insertion at a regional Australian tertiary centre in the 15 months to January 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, mention of an IPC or drain in the CXR request and/or by the radiologist in their final report. Subsequent identification on thoracic ultrasound, computed-tomography (CT) scan or uncomplicated drainage by nurses was considered evidence that the IPC was correctly sited. <b>Results:</b> 13 (Rocket) IPCs were inserted into 11 patients. 35 CXRs were performed with a median of 2 (IQR 1-4) CXRs per patient. IPCs were identified on 16/35 occasions, giving a sensitivity of 46% (95% CI 26-62%). This rose to 69% (11/16) when the IPC was mentioned in the request. On one occasion the IPC was incorrectly reported as extra-thoracic. No adverse events occurred due to the IPC not being seen on CXR. All the relevant IPCs came from specific lots which had a thinner barium stripe. <b>Conclusions:</b> This study suggests that at least a subgroup of (Rocket) IPCs are poorly seen on CXR. This may have implications for the detection of complications, compromise clinical decision making, or require additional imaging. (Rocket) has withdrawn the relevant devices from the market, but these catheters remain in-situ for many patients worldwide and radiology and pleural services should be aware of this issue.","PeriodicalId":34850,"journal":{"name":"Imaging","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2023.pa4006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Correct placement of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) is often confirmed on chest x-ray (CXR). Recent anecdotal reports suggest a brand of IPCs (Rocket) may be difficult to visualise due to a thinner barium stripe. This study aims to evaluate the sensitivity of CXR for detecting these IPCs. Methods: Medical records of patients who underwent IPC insertion at a regional Australian tertiary centre in the 15 months to January 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, mention of an IPC or drain in the CXR request and/or by the radiologist in their final report. Subsequent identification on thoracic ultrasound, computed-tomography (CT) scan or uncomplicated drainage by nurses was considered evidence that the IPC was correctly sited. Results: 13 (Rocket) IPCs were inserted into 11 patients. 35 CXRs were performed with a median of 2 (IQR 1-4) CXRs per patient. IPCs were identified on 16/35 occasions, giving a sensitivity of 46% (95% CI 26-62%). This rose to 69% (11/16) when the IPC was mentioned in the request. On one occasion the IPC was incorrectly reported as extra-thoracic. No adverse events occurred due to the IPC not being seen on CXR. All the relevant IPCs came from specific lots which had a thinner barium stripe. Conclusions: This study suggests that at least a subgroup of (Rocket) IPCs are poorly seen on CXR. This may have implications for the detection of complications, compromise clinical decision making, or require additional imaging. (Rocket) has withdrawn the relevant devices from the market, but these catheters remain in-situ for many patients worldwide and radiology and pleural services should be aware of this issue.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
胸片对一种品牌留置胸膜导尿管显像的敏感性
导读:胸腔留置导尿管(IPCs)的正确放置通常在胸部x线片(CXR)上得到证实。最近的轶事报告显示,由于钡条纹较薄,IPCs品牌(Rocket)可能难以可视化。本研究旨在评价CXR检测这些IPCs的敏感性。方法:回顾性分析截至2023年1月的15个月内在澳大利亚某区域性三级中心接受IPC插入的患者病历。对患者人口统计、急诊请求和/或放射科医生在最终报告中提及的IPC或引流进行了记录审查。随后的胸部超声、计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描或护士的简单引流被认为是IPC正确定位的证据。结果:11例患者共植入13枚(Rocket) IPCs。35例cxr,平均每例患者2例(IQR 1-4) cxr。IPCs在16/35次中被识别,灵敏度为46% (95% CI 26-62%)。当请求中提到IPC时,这一比例上升到69%(11/16)。有一次IPC被错误地报告为胸外。未发生因未在CXR上看到IPC而导致的不良事件。所有相关的ipc都来自具有较薄钡条纹的特定批次。结论:本研究表明,至少有一个亚群(Rocket) IPCs在CXR上表现不佳。这可能会影响并发症的发现,影响临床决策,或需要额外的影像学检查。(Rocket)已经从市场上撤回了相关设备,但这些导管仍然存在于世界各地的许多患者中,放射学和胸膜服务应该意识到这个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Imaging
Imaging MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
25.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Radiographic analysis provides evidence for the etiology of pulmonary cysts in COVID-19 Dieulafoy's lesion, the endovascular approach as a therapeutic option when endoscopic treatment has failed: A case report and brief review Three-dimensional (3D) transthoracic echocardiography in Cor Triatriatum Sinister: Make new friends but keep the old Colonic basidiobolomycosis masquerading as colon cancer with liver metastasis: A case report and review of literature Dual-energy CT in the emergency department: A pictorial essay from a single center experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1