Small versus large-bore thoracostomy for traumatic hemothorax: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Lyons, Nicole B. [1 ]
Abdelhamid, Mohamed O. [1 ]
Collie, Brianna L. [1 ]
Ramsey, Walter A. [1 ]
O'Neil, Christopher F. [1 ]
Delamater, Jessica M. [1 ]
Cobler-Lichter, Michael D. [1 ]
Shagabayeva, Larisa [1 ]
Proctor, Kenneth G. [1 ]
Namias, Nicholas [1 ]
Meizoso, Jonathan P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Miller Sch Med, DeWitt Daughtry Family Dept Surg, Div Trauma Surg Crit Care & Burns, Miami, FL USA
来源
关键词
Thoracostomy; hemothorax; pigtail catheter; chest tube; CHEST TUBE; RETAINED HEMOTHORAX; THORACIC IRRIGATION; PIGTAIL CATHETERS; MANAGEMENT; SIZE; FR;
D O I
10.1097/TA.0000000000004412
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Traumatic hemothorax (HTX) is common, and while it is recommended to drain it with a tube thoracostomy, there is no consensus on the optimal catheter size. We performed a systematic review to test the hypothesis that small bore tube thoracostomy (SBTT) (<= 14 F) is as effective as large-bore tube thoracostomy (LBTT) (>= 20F) for the treatment of HTX. METHODS: Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane review were searched from inception to November 2022 for randomized controlled trials or cohort studies that included adult trauma patients with HTX who received a tube thoracostomy. Data was extracted and Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklists were used for study appraisal. The primary outcome was failure rate, defined as incompletely drained or retained HTX requiring a second intervention. Cumulative analysis was performed with chi 2 test for dichotomous variables and an unpaired t-test for continuous variables. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. RESULTS: There were 2,008 articles screened, of which nine were included in the analysis. The studies included 1,847 patients (714 SBTT and 1,233 LBTT). The mean age of patients was 46 years, 75% were male, average ISS was 20, and 81% had blunt trauma. Failure rate was not significantly different between SBTT (17.8%) and LBTT (21.5%) (p = 0.166). Additionally, there were no significant differences between SBTT vs. LBTT in mortality (2.9% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.062) or complication rate (12.3% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.941), however SBTT had significantly higher initial drainage volumes (753 vs. 398 mL, p < 0.001) and fewer tube days (4.3 vs. 6.2, p < 0.001). There are several limitations. Some studies did not report all the outcomes of interest, and many of the studies are subject to selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: BTT may be as effective as LBTT for the treatment of traumatic HTX. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis; Level IV.
引用
收藏
页码:631 / 638
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Traumatic kidney injuries: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Petrone, Patrizio
    Perez-Calvo, Javier
    Brathwaite, Collin E. M.
    Islam, Shahidul
    Joseph, D'Andrea K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2020, 74 : 13 - 21
  • [22] The management of occult hemothorax in adults with thoracic trauma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Gilbert, Richard W.
    Fontebasso, Adam M.
    Park, Lily
    Tran, Alexandre
    Lampron, Jacinthe
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMA AND ACUTE CARE SURGERY, 2020, 89 (06): : 1225 - 1232
  • [23] Small bites versus large bites during fascial closure of midline laparotomies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Dias Rasador, Ana Caroline
    de Figueiredo, Sergio Mazzola Poli
    Fernandez, Miguel Godeiro
    Dias, Yasmin Jardim Meirelles
    Martin, Rafael Ribeiro Hernandez
    da Silveira, Carlos Andre Balthazar
    Lu, Richard
    LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2024, 409 (01)
  • [24] Small-bites versus large-bites closure of midline laparotomies: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Morarasu, Stefan
    Lunca, Sorinel
    O'Brien, Luke
    Lynch, Paul
    Musina, Ana Maria
    Roata, Cristian Ene
    Zaharia, Raluca
    Ong, Wee Liam
    Dimofte, Gabriel-Mihail
    Clancy, Cillian
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2025, 27 (03)
  • [25] Small bites versus large bites during fascial closure of midline laparotomies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ana Caroline Dias Rasador
    Sergio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo
    Miguel Godeiro Fernandez
    Yasmin Jardim Meirelles Dias
    Rafael Ribeiro Hernandez Martin
    Carlos André Balthazar da Silveira
    Richard Lu
    Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery, 409
  • [26] Outcomes with MANTA Device for Large-Bore Access Closure after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis
    Megaly, Michael
    Buda, Kevin G.
    Brilakis, Emmanouil S.
    Pershad, Ashish
    Louka, Boshra
    Saad, Marwan
    Abdelaziz, Hesham K.
    Narayanan, Mahesh Anantha
    Syed, Mubbasher
    Mentias, Amgad
    Omer, Mohamed
    Alexander, Jason
    Titus, Jessica
    Garcia, Santiago
    STRUCTURAL HEART-THE JOURNAL OF THE HEART TEAM, 2020, 4 (05): : 420 - 426
  • [27] Small-bore versus large-bore catheters for talc pleurodesis of malignant pleural effusion: a tertiary hospital experience
    Akturk, Ulku Aka
    Kocak, Nagihan Durmus
    Ozturk, Cansel Atinkaya
    Sengul, Aysun
    Ernam, Dilek
    Tepetam, Merve Alan
    Ersoz, Elcin
    BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH-INDIA, 2017, 28 (18): : 8001 - 8006
  • [28] Safety of Thoracentesis and Tube Thoracostomy in Patients With Uncorrected Coagulopathy A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Fong, Clare
    Tan, Colin Wei Chang
    Tan, Drusilla Kai Yan
    See, Kay Choong
    CHEST, 2021, 160 (05) : 1875 - 1889
  • [29] Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Manta device and Perclose device for closure of large bore arterial access
    Cheema, Tayyab
    Venero Jr, Carmelo
    Champaneria, Shivam
    Younas, Sundas
    Hadeed Khan, Muhammad Adil
    Anjum, Ibrar
    Ijaz, Unaiza
    Haider, Sajjad
    Akbar, Muhammad Shoaib
    Abdul-Waheed, Mohammad
    Saleem, Sameer
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR ACCESS, 2025, 26 (01): : 15 - 21
  • [30] Small bite versus large bite stitching technique for midline laparotomy wound closure: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Yii, Erwin
    Onggo, James
    Yii, Ming Kon
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 46 (11) : 4719 - 4726