Transrectal and transvaginal catheter drainages and aspirations for management of pelvic fluid collections: technique, technical success rates, and outcomes in 150 patients
- 16 Downloads
To evaluate outcomes of image-guided transrectal/transvaginal (TR/TV) drainage for symptomatic pelvic fluid collections (SPFCs).
Materials and methods
Single-center retrospective study of 150 consecutive patients (36 males, 114 females, average age 41 years) who underwent attempted TR/TV drainages of SPFCs during an 11-year, 5-month period. All patients presented with pain and had SPFCs with rectal or vaginal contact on preceding diagnostic CT. Routine technique included Foley catheter insertion, image-guidance with ultrasound and fluoroscopy, 18 g/20 cm Chiba needles, and Seldinger technique for catheter insertion. No anoscope or speculum was used. SPFCs causes were classified by etiology including postoperative—70 (47%); gynecologic—49 (33%); and gastrointestinal—31 (21%). Resolutions of the SPFCs without the need for surgical intervention, collection recurrence, and complications were assessed. Surgical management after attempted TR/TV drainage was considered a failure.
Technical success was achieved in 172/180 procedures [TR 128/134 (95%); TV 44/46 (96%)]. TR/TV drainage successfully managed SPFCs in 141/150 patients (94% success rate) and 145/150 patients (97%) did not require surgical intervention; 4 patients with failed TR/TV drainage attempts were managed conservatively. In 5 patients requiring surgery, 4 were after technically successful TR/TV and 1 was after a failed TR attempt. Complications occurred in 4 (3%) patients: 2 bladder punctures (both resolved with medical management), 1 propagation of sepsis, and 1 hemorrhagic return from TR drainage that prompted surgical exploration.
Transrectal and transvaginal drainage had high technical success rates and were successful in managing the majority (141/150; 94%) of patients with pelvic fluid collections.
KeywordsImage-guided percutaneous drainage Transrectal drainage Transvaginal drainage Abscess drainage Pelvic abscesses Intraabdominal abscesses
No funding was received for this study. Dr. Ballard receives salary support from National Institutes of Health TOP-TIER grant T32-EB021955.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was waived by the institutional research committee for this HIPAA compliant retrospective study.
- 12.Hovsepian DM, Steele JR, Skinner CS, Malden ES (1999) Transrectal versus transvaginal abscess drainage: survey of patient tolerance and effect on activities of daily living. Radiology 212:159–163. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.212.1.r99jl23159 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Ballard DH, Flanagan ST, D’Agostino HB. Abscess Drainage. In Shafa J and Kee S (1st Ed.), Learning Interventional Radiology 2019. Elsevier IncGoogle Scholar
- 17.Ballard DH, Mokkarala M, D’Agostino HB (2018) Percutaneous drainage and management of fluid collections associated with necrotic or cystic tumors in the abdomen and pelvis. Abdom Radiol (NY). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1854-z