Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conventional versus pigtail chest tube—are they similar for treatment of malignant pleural effusions?

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The optimal chest tube type and size for drainage and chemical pleurodesis of malignant pleural effusions remains controversial. This retrospective study was conducted to compare the efficacy of conventional versus pigtail chest tube in the treatment of malignant pleural effusions.

Methods

Patients submitted to chest tube drainage and slurry talc pleurodesis due to malignant pleural effusion in our pulmonology ward from 2012 to 2016 were eligible. According to the type of chest tube, they were divided into two groups: group I—conventional chest tube and group II—pigtail chest tube. Number of deaths, recurrence of malignant pleural effusion, and timelines associated with the procedures were reviewed and compared between groups.

Results

Out of the 61 included patients, 46 (75.4%) were included in group I and 15 (24.6%) in group II. Only one patient had pigtail chest tube obstruction, with posterior insertion of conventional chest tube. Death during hospital stay and up to 3 months, recurrence at 4 weeks, total duration of hospital stay, time from chest tube insertion to pleurodesis, and time from chest tube insertion to removal were not significantly different between the two groups (all p > 0.05).

Discussion

These findings suggest that pigtail chest tube can be an alternative on palliation, with no compromise in pleurodesis performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Roberts ME, Neville E, Berrisford RG, Antunes G, Ali NJ, on behalf of the BTS Pleural Disease Guideline Group (2010) Management of a malignant pleural effusion: British Thoracic Society pleural disease guideline 2010. Thorax 65(Suppl 2):ii32–ii40

  2. Xia H, Wang XJ, Zhou Q, Shi HZ, Tong ZH (2014) Efficacy and safety of talc pleurodesis for malignant pleural effusion: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 9(1):e87060

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Thomas R, Francis R, Davies HE, Lee YCG (2014) Interventional therapies for malignant pleural effusions: the present and the future. Respirology 19(6):809–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Light RW (2011) Pleural controversy: optimal chest tube size for drainage. Respirology 16:244–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Parulekar W, Di Primio G, Matzinger F, Dennie C, Bociek G (2001) Use of small-bore vs large-bore chest tubes for treatment of malignant pleural effusions. Chest 120(1):19–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Clementsen P, Evald T, Grode G, Hansen M, Krag Jacobsen G, Faurschou P (1998) Treatment of malignant pleural effusion: pleurodesis using a small percutaneous catheter. A prospective randomized study. Respir Med 92(3):593–596

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Parker LA, Charnock GC, Delany DJ (1989) Small bore catheter drainage and sclerotherapy for malignant pleural effusions. Cancer 64(6):1281–1221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ghoneim AHA, Elkomy HA, Elshora AE, Mehrez M (2014) Usefulness of pigtail catheter in pleurodesis of malignant pleural effusion. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc 63:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Heffner JE, Klein JS (2008) Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusions. Mayo Clin Proc 83(2):235–250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Davies HE, Mishra EK, Kahan BC, Wrightson JM, Stanton AE, Guhan A, Davies CWH, Grayez J, Harrison R, Prasad A, Crosthwaite N, Lee YCG, Davies RJO, Miller RF, Rahman NM (2012) Effect of an indwelling pleural catheter vs chest tube and talc pleurodesis for relieving dyspnea in patients with malignant pleural effusion: the TIME2 randomized controlled trial. JAMA 307(22):2383–2389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Rahman NM, Pepperell J, Rehal S, Saba T, Tang A, Ali N, West A, Hettiarachchi G, Mukherjee D, Samuel J, Bentley A, Dowson L, Miles J, Ryan CF, Yoneda KY, Chauhan A, Corcoran JP, Psallidas I, Wrightson JM, Hallifax R, Davies HE, Lee YCG, Dobson M, Hedley EL, Seaton D, Russell N, Chapman M, McFadyen BM, Shaw RA, Davies RJO, Maskell NA, Nunn AJ, Miller RF (2015) Effect of opioids vs NSAIDs and larger vs smaller chest tube size on pain control and pleurodesis efficacy among patients with malignant pleural effusion: the TIME1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314(24):2641–2653

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Burgers JA, Kunst PWA, Koolen MGJ, Willems LNA, Burgers JS, van den Heuvel M (2008) Pleural drainage and pleurodesis: implementation of guidelines in four hospitals. Eur Respir J 32:1321–1327

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Caglayan B, Torun E, Turan D, Fidan A, Gemici C, Sarac G, Salepci B, Kiral N (2008) Efficacy of iodopovidone pleurodesis and comparison of small-bore catheter versus large-bore chest tube. Ann Surg Oncol 15(9):2594–2599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fysh ETH, Waterer GW, Kendall PA, Bremner PR, Dina S, Geelhoed E, McCarney K, Morey S, Millward M, Musk AWB, Lee YCG (2012) Indwelling pleural catheters reduce inpatient days over pleurodesis for malignant pleural effusion. Chest 142(2):394–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Porcel JM, Lui MM, Lerner AD, Davies HE, Feller-Kopman D, Lee YC (2017) Comparing approaches to the management of malignant pleural effusions. Expert Rev Respir Med 11(4):273–284

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pulmonology Department, Centro Hospitalar Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal

    Maria Aurora Mendes, Nuno China Pereira, Carla Ribeiro, Manuela Vanzeller, Teresa Shiang & Sérgio Campainha

  2. Departamento de Matemática, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto and Centro de Matemática da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal

    Rita Gaio

Authors
  1. Maria Aurora Mendes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nuno China Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carla Ribeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Manuela Vanzeller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Teresa Shiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rita Gaio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sérgio Campainha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Aurora Mendes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mendes, M.A., China Pereira, N., Ribeiro, C. et al. Conventional versus pigtail chest tube—are they similar for treatment of malignant pleural effusions?. Support Care Cancer 26, 2499–2502 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4171-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4171-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation