• Ann Emerg Med · Jul 2020

    Review

    Comparative Effectiveness of Interventions in Initial Management of Spontaneous Pneumothorax: A Systematic Review and a Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.

    • Srinivas R Mummadi, Jennifer de Longpre', and Peter Y Hahn.
    • Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: m.srinivasreddy@gmail.com.
    • Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Jul 1; 76 (1): 88-102.

    Study ObjectiveThe best initial strategy for nontension symptomatic spontaneous pneumothorax is unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the most efficacious, safe, and efficient initial intervention in adults with nontension spontaneous pneumothorax.MethodsMEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1950 through December 2019 (print and electronic publications). Randomized controlled trials evaluating needle aspiration, narrow-bore chest tube (<14 F) with or without Heimlich valve insertion, and large-bore chest tube (≥14 F) insertion in spontaneous pneumothorax were included. Network meta-analyses were performed with a Bayesian random-effects model.ResultsTwelve studies were included in this review (n=781 patients). Analyses of efficacy (n=12 trials) revealed no significant differences between the interventions studied: narrow- versus large-bore chest tubes, odds ratio (OR) 1.05 (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.38 to 2.87); large-bore chest tube versus needle aspiration, OR 1.25 (95% CrI 0.65 to 2.62); and narrow-bore chest tube versus needle aspiration, OR 1.32 (95% CrI 0.54 to 3.42). Analyses of safety (n=10 trials) revealed a significant difference between needle aspiration and large-bore chest tube interventions: OR 0.10 (95% CrI 0.03 to 0.40). No differences were observed in needle aspiration versus narrow-bore chest tube (OR 0.29 [95% CrI 0.05 to 1.82]), and narrow- versus large-bore chest tube comparisons (OR 0.35 [95% CrI 0.07 to 1.67]). Analyses of efficiency were not pursued because of variation in reporting the length of stay (n=12 trials). Narrow-bore chest tube (<14 F) had the highest likelihood of top ranking in terms of immediate success (surface under the cumulative ranking curve=64%). Needle aspiration had the highest likelihood of top ranking in terms of safety (surface under the cumulative ranking curve=95.8%).ConclusionIn the initial management of nontension spontaneous pneumothorax, the optimal strategy between the choices of a narrow-bore chest tube (<14 F, top ranked in efficacy) and needle aspiration (top ranked in safety) is unclear. Complications were more common in large-bore chest tube (≥14 F, including 14-F tube) insertions compared with needle aspiration.Copyright © 2020 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…