Advertisement

Lung

pp 1–12 | Cite as

Needle Aspiration Versus Closed Thoracostomy in the Treatment of Spontaneous Pneumothorax: A Meta-analysis

  • Jixiang Tan
  • Hong Chen
  • Jin He
  • Lin ZhaoEmail author
PLEURAL DISEASE

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness and safety between needle aspiration (NA) and closed thoracostomy (CT) method in adult spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) patients and to explore the most effective and safe protocol by using meta-analysis method.

Materials and Methods

This study was based on Cochrane methodology for conducting meta-analysis. Only randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. The participants were adults who had SP. The Review Manager Database was used to analyze selected studies.

Results

Nine RCTs involving 665 patients were included. Although the initial success rate of CT was higher, the two groups were not statistically significant (RR 0.87 [95% CI 0.76–1.00]; p = 0.05). Compared the NA group, the use of CT method to treat SP significantly increased complications (RR 0.17 [95% CI 0.06–0.45]; p = 0.0003) and operation rate (RR 0.57 [95% CI 0.35–0.95]; p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the 1-week success rate, admitted rate, 3-month recurrence rate, 1-year recurrence rate, and recurrence time between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP) and secondary spontaneous pneumothorax (SSP) patients showed that the initial success rate of the CT method was higher than NA group (RR 0.74 [95% CI 0.60–0.92]; p = 0.007).

Conclusions

For the treatment of SP, NA method could significantly decrease complication rate, operation rate, as well as hospital stay length, compared with the CT method. Subgroup analysis indicated that the use of CT method in SSP and PSP patients might increase the initial success rate.

Keywords

Needle aspiration Closed thoracostomy Tube drainage Spontaneous pneumothorax Meta-analysis 

Notes

Authors Contribution

Conceived and designed the study: JT, LZ; Selected references and extracted data: JT, HC; Analyzed and interpreted the data: JT, HC; Wrote the paper: JT; Provided critical revisions: JH, LZ; Approved the final version of the manuscript: JT, HC, JH, LZ.

Funding

There is no funding to disclose.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Millard FJC, Pepper JR (1995) Pneumothorax. Respiratory medicine. 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia. pp 1569–1579Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Melton LJ, Hepper NCG, Offord KP (1987) Incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax in Olmsted County, Minnesota: 1950–1974. Am Rev Respir Dis 29:1379–1382Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaneda H, Nakano T, Taniguchi Y et al (2013) Three-step management of pneumothorax: time for a re-think on initial management. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 16(2):186–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harvey J, Prescott RJ (1994) Simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for spontaneous pneumothorax in patients with normal lungs. BMJ 309(6965):1338–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baumann MH, Strange C, Heffner JE et al (2001) Management of spontaneous pneumothorax: an American College of Chest Physicians Delphi consensus statement. Chest 119:590–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MacDuff A, Arnold A, Harvey J (2010) Management of spontaneous pneumothorax: British Thoracic Society pleural disease guideline 2010. Thorax 65(Suppl 2):ii18–ii31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tschopp JM, Bintcliffe O, Astoul P et al (2015) ERS task force statement: diagnosis and treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. Eur Respir J 46:321–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhu P, Xia H, Sun Z et al (2019) Manual aspiration versus chest tube drainage in primary spontaneous pneumothorax without underlying lung diseases: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 28(6):936–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carson-Chahhoud KV, Wakai A, van Agteren JE, et al (2017) Simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for primary spontaneous pneumothorax in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:CD004479PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang C, Lyu M, Zhou J et al (2017) Chest tube drainage versus needle aspiration for primary spontaneous pneumothorax: which is better? J Thorac Dis 9(10):4027–4038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aguinagalde B, Zabaleta J, Fuentes M et al (2010) Percutaneous aspiration versus tube drainage for spontaneous pneumothorax: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 37(5):1129–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim IH, Kang DK, Min HK et al (2019) A prospective randomized trial comparing manual needle aspiration to closed thoracostomy as an initial treatment for the first episode of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 52(2):85–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramouz A, Lashkari MH, Fakour S et al (2018) Randomized controlled trial on the comparison of chest tube drainage and needle aspiration in the treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. Pak J Med Sci 34(6):1369–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thelle A, Gjerdevik M, SueChu M, et al (2017) Randomised comparison of needle aspiration and chest tube drainage in spontaneous pneumothorax. Eur Respir J.  https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01296-2016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Korczyński P, Górska K, Nasiłowski J et al (2015) Comparison of small bore catheter aspiration and chest tube drainage in the management of spontaneous pneumothorax. Adv Exp Med Biol 866:15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Higgins JPT, Green S (2005) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 4.2.5Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D et al (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ho KK, Ong ME, Koh MS et al (2011) A randomized controlled trial comparing minichest tube and needle aspiration in outpatient management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. Am J Emerg Med 29(9):1152–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ayed AK, Chandrasekaran C, Sukumar M (2006) Aspiration versus tube drainage in primary spontaneous pneumothorax: a randomised study. Eur Respir J 27(3):477–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Noppen M, Alexander P, Driesen P et al (2002) Manual aspiration versus chest tube drainage in first episodes of primary spontaneous pneumothorax: a multicenter, prospective, randomized pilot study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 165:1240–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Andrivet P, Djedaini K, Teboul JL et al (1995) Spontaneous pneumothorax. Comparison of thoracic drainage vs immediate or delayed needle aspiration. Chest 108(2):335–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Harvey J, Prescott RJ (1994) Simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for spontaneous pneumothorax in patients with normal lungs. Br Thorac Soc Res Comm BMJ 309(6965):1338–1339Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tupchong K, Foran M, Koyfman A (2014) Can Heimlich valves along with intercostal catheters be used to safely manage pneumothoraces for outpatients? Ann Emerg Med 64:660–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Light RW (1995) Pneumothorax. In: Light RW (ed) Pleural diseases, 3rd edn. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore (MD), pp 242–277Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ohata M, Suzuki H (1980) Pathogenesis of spontaneous pneumothorax: with special reference to the ultrastructure of emphysematous bullae. Chest 77:771–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bense L, Eklund G, Wiman LG (1987) Smoking and the increased risk of contracting spontaneous pneumothorax. Chest 92:1009–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bense L, Eklund G, Wiman LG (1992) Bilateral bronchial anomaly: a pathogenetic factor in spontaneous pneumothorax. Am Rev Respir Dis 146:513–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gupta D, Hansell A, Nichols T et al (2000) Epidemiology of pneumothorax in England. Thorax 55(8):666–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sahn SA, Heffner JE (2000) Spontaneous pneumothorax. N Engl J Med 342(12):868–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hallgrímsson JG (1978) Spontaneous pneumothorax in Iceland with special reference to the idiopathic type. A clinical and epidemiological investigation. Scand J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Suppl 21:1–85Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sassoon CS (1995) The etiology and treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. Curr Opin Pulm Med 1(4):331–338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Huang Y, Huang H, Li Q et al (2014) Approach of the treatment for pneumothorax. J Thorac Dis 6(Suppl 4):S416–S420PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Emergency & Critical Care MedicineThe First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical UniversityChongqingChina
  2. 2.Department of OrthopedicsThe First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical UniversityChongqingChina
  3. 3.Department of NephrologyChonggang General HospitalChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations