The growing utilisation of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) has put forward a new era in the management of recurrent symptomatic pleural effusions. IPC use is safe compared to talc pleurodesis, though complications can occur. Pleural infection affects <5% of patients, and is usually responsive to antibiotic treatment without requiring catheter removal or surgery. Pleural loculations develop over time, limiting drainage in 10% of patients, which can be improved with intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy. Catheter tract metastasis can occur with most tumours but is more common in mesothelioma. The metastases usually respond to analgaesics and/or external radiotherapy. Long-term intermittent drainage of exudative effusions or chylothorax can potentially lead to loss of nutrients, though no data exist on any clinical impact. Fibrin clots within the catheter lumen can result in blockage. Chest pain following IPC insertion is often mild, and adjustments in analgaesics and drainage practice are usually all that are required. As clinical experience with the use of IPC accumulates, the profile and natural course of complications are increasingly described. We aim to summarise the available literature on IPC-related complications and the evidence to support specific strategies.
Purpose of reviewPleural effusions have a major impact on the cardiorespiratory system. This article reviews the pathophysiological effects of pleural effusions and pleural drainage, their relationship with breathlessness, and highlights key knowledge gaps.Recent findingsThe basis for breathlessness in pleural effusions and relief following thoracentesis is not well understood. Many existing studies on the pathophysiology of breathlessness in pleural effusions are limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous design and a lack of direct measurements of respiratory muscle function. Gas exchange worsens with pleural effusions and improves after thoracentesis. Improvements in ventilatory capacity and lung volumes following pleural drainage are small, and correlate poorly with the volume of fluid drained and the severity of breathlessness. Rather than lung compression, expansion of the chest wall, including displacement of the diaphragm, appears to be the principle mechanism by which the effusion is accommodated. Deflation of the thoracic cage and restoration of diaphragmatic function after thoracentesis may improve diaphragm effectiveness and efficiency, and this may be an important mechanism by which breathlessness improves. Effusions do not usually lead to major hemodynamic changes, but large effusions may cause cardiac tamponade and ventricular diastolic collapse. Patients with effusions can have impaired exercise capacity and poor sleep quality and efficiency.SummaryPleural effusions are associated with abnormalities in gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, respiratory muscle function and hemodynamics, but the association between these abnormalities and breathlessness remains unclear. Prospective studies should aim to identify the key mechanisms of effusion-related breathlessness and predictors of improvement following pleural drainage.
The approach to management of malignant pleural effusions (MPE) has changed over the past few decades. The key goals of MPE management are to relieve patient symptoms using the least invasive means and in the most cost-effective manner. There is now a realization that patient-reported outcome measures should be the primary goal of MPE treatment, and this now is the focus in most clinical trials. Efforts to minimize patient morbidity are complemented by development of less invasive treatments that have mostly replaced the more aggressive surgical approaches of the past. Therapeutic thoracentesis is simple, effective and generally safe, although its benefits may only be temporary. Pleurodesis is the conventional and for a long time the only definitive therapy available. However, the efficacy and safety of talc pleurodesis has been challenged. Indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) drainage is increasingly accepted worldwide and represents a new concept to improve symptoms without necessarily generating pleural symphysis. Recent studies support the effectiveness of IPC treatment and provide reassurance regarding its safety. An unprecedented number of clinical trials are now underway to improve various aspects of MPE care. However, choosing an optimal intervention for MPE in an individual patient remains a challenge due to our limited understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of breathlessness in MPE and a lack of predictors of survival and pleurodesis outcome. This review provides an overview of common pleural interventional procedures used for MPE management, controversies and limitations of current practice, and areas of research most needed to improve practice in future.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews peripheral muscles, and we presented the results narratively. Limited data were available for level of physical activity, adverse events, performance status, body weight and overall survival. Main results We identified six RCTs, involving 221 participants. The mean age of participants ranged from 59 to 70 years; the sample size ranged from 20 to 111 participants. Overall, we found that the risk of bias in the included studies was high, and the quality of evidence for all outcomes was low. Study characteristics We looked for all research studies (randomised controlled trials) published up to July 2018. We found six studies which included 221 participants, with an average age ranging from 59 to 70 years. These studies included di erent numbers of people, ranging from 20 to 111. Key results Our results showed that, compared to those who did not exercise, people with lung cancer who did exercise were fitter and had a better quality of life. We did not find any di erence in muscle strength, shortness of breath, tiredness, feelings of anxiety and depression, or lung function. No serious harms were reported in people with lung cancer who exercised, but only three studies talked about harms. Quality of the evidence The results of this review are not clear, mainly because of the small number of studies found, the small numbers of people in those studies, and because the studies did not seem to have been carried out to a high standard.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.