Needle Aspiration Versus Closed Thoracostomy in the Treatment of Spontaneous Pneumothorax: A Meta-analysis
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.
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).
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.
KeywordsNeedle aspiration Closed thoracostomy Tube drainage Spontaneous pneumothorax Meta-analysis
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.
There is no funding to disclose.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- 1.Millard FJC, Pepper JR (1995) Pneumothorax. Respiratory medicine. 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia. pp 1569–1579Google Scholar
- 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
- 16.Higgins JPT, Green S (2005) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 4.2.5Google Scholar
- 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
- 24.Light RW (1995) Pneumothorax. In: Light RW (ed) Pleural diseases, 3rd edn. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore (MD), pp 242–277Google Scholar
- 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