Indwelling tunneled pleural catheters in patients with hepatic hydrothorax: A single-center analysis for outcomes and complications

Fatmah F. Alhabeeb, K. Carle-Talbot, N. Rakocevic, Tinghua Zhang, Michael A. Mitchell, K. Amjadi, Chanel Kwok
{"title":"Indwelling tunneled pleural catheters in patients with hepatic hydrothorax: A single-center analysis for outcomes and complications","authors":"Fatmah F. Alhabeeb, K. Carle-Talbot, N. Rakocevic, Tinghua Zhang, Michael A. Mitchell, K. Amjadi, Chanel Kwok","doi":"10.1080/24745332.2022.2125459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Rationale Patients with refractory hepatic hydrothorax (HH) are challenging to manage due to associated risks involved with repeated procedures required for drainage of the effusion. There is paucity of data describing the role of indwelling pleural catheters (IPC) in HH. We describe our experience with IPCs for management of refractory HH in collaboration with our homecare nursing services. Objective We are describing our Canadian experience using IPCs for HH, focusing on outcomes, safety, and complications to improve the management of this condition. Methods This is a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database of all patients with HH who underwent IPC insertion between May 2006 and February 2019 at our tertiary center. Patients’ characteristics, procedural variables, outcomes and estimated survival analysis post IPC insertion were analyzed. Measurements and main results A total of 40 patients underwent 43 IPC insertions. Seven catheters (17.5%) resulted in pleural infection, without any associated deaths. Mean pleural fluid protein level was lower among patients who developed pleural infection compared to those who did not (11.5 g/L vs 16 g/L; p = 0.0015). Median survival was 12.7 months (95% CI, 6.4-43.4). Twenty-one catheters were removed within 149 days (+/- 50.2). Twelve patients died with the IPC in-situ within 69.5 days (+/- 48.7). Conclusion In refractory HH, IPCs can be safely used. Associated complications can be mitigated with frequent clinical monitoring and intermittent drainage of the effusion by dedicated homecare nursing services. Further studies establishing the role for prophylactic antibiotics in high-risk population may be of value.","PeriodicalId":9471,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Respiratory, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine","volume":"27 1","pages":"4 - 9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Respiratory, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24745332.2022.2125459","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Rationale Patients with refractory hepatic hydrothorax (HH) are challenging to manage due to associated risks involved with repeated procedures required for drainage of the effusion. There is paucity of data describing the role of indwelling pleural catheters (IPC) in HH. We describe our experience with IPCs for management of refractory HH in collaboration with our homecare nursing services. Objective We are describing our Canadian experience using IPCs for HH, focusing on outcomes, safety, and complications to improve the management of this condition. Methods This is a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database of all patients with HH who underwent IPC insertion between May 2006 and February 2019 at our tertiary center. Patients’ characteristics, procedural variables, outcomes and estimated survival analysis post IPC insertion were analyzed. Measurements and main results A total of 40 patients underwent 43 IPC insertions. Seven catheters (17.5%) resulted in pleural infection, without any associated deaths. Mean pleural fluid protein level was lower among patients who developed pleural infection compared to those who did not (11.5 g/L vs 16 g/L; p = 0.0015). Median survival was 12.7 months (95% CI, 6.4-43.4). Twenty-one catheters were removed within 149 days (+/- 50.2). Twelve patients died with the IPC in-situ within 69.5 days (+/- 48.7). Conclusion In refractory HH, IPCs can be safely used. Associated complications can be mitigated with frequent clinical monitoring and intermittent drainage of the effusion by dedicated homecare nursing services. Further studies establishing the role for prophylactic antibiotics in high-risk population may be of value.
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
肝性胸水患者留置隧道式胸膜导尿管:结果和并发症的单中心分析
原因:难治性肝性胸水(HH)患者由于需要反复进行积液引流的相关风险而难以管理。关于留置胸膜导管(IPC)在HH中的作用,目前缺乏相关数据。我们描述了我们与家庭护理服务合作的IPCs管理难治性HH的经验。我们描述了加拿大在HH中使用IPCs的经验,重点关注结果、安全性和并发症,以改善这种情况的管理。方法:对2006年5月至2019年2月在我们三级中心接受IPC插入的所有HH患者的前瞻性数据库进行回顾性研究。分析IPC插入后患者特征、程序变量、结局和估计生存分析。测量和主要结果共40例患者进行了43次IPC插入。7例(17.5%)置管导致胸膜感染,无相关死亡。发生胸膜感染的患者的平均胸膜液蛋白水平低于未发生胸膜感染的患者(11.5 g/L vs 16 g/L;p = 0.0015)。中位生存期为12.7个月(95% CI, 6.4-43.4)。149天内取出21根导管(+/- 50.2)。12例患者在69.5天内死亡(+/- 48.7)。结论对于难治性HH, IPCs可以安全使用。相关并发症可以通过频繁的临床监测和通过专门的家庭护理服务间歇引流积液来减轻。进一步研究确定预防性抗生素在高危人群中的作用可能是有价值的。
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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
51
期刊最新文献
Cost-effectiveness of triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate compared with dual therapy for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Canada Lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma and HIV: A case report Effect of geographical distance on repeat pleural procedures in patients managed by indwelling pleural catheters: A retrospective cohort study Medical industry contributions to the climate crisis: Behind the green drapes Chapitre 4: Le diagnostic de l’infection tuberculeuse
×
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