The British journal of radiology · 2022
Promising role for pleural vent in pneumothorax following CT-guided biopsy of lung lesions.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ball Michael, Babu Suresh, Wallis Adam, Asciak Rachelle
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety, effectiveness and cost-benefit of ambulatory pleural vent compared to conventional chest drain for pneumothorax following CT-guided biopsy of lung lesions (CTGB).
METHODS: We retrospectively analysed electronic hospital records of patients requiring intervention for pneumothorax following CTGB. All patients treated with pleural vent over a 2-year period (August 2017-July 2019) were included and compared to a control group of all patients treated with chest drain over a previous 2-year period (August 2014-July 2016).
RESULTS: Patients managed with a pleural vent had a shorter length of hospital stay compared to the chest drain group (median 0 days vs 4.5 days, p < 0.01). The mean cost of follow-up in the pleural vent group was £530.36 per patient compared to a mean of £2699.38 per patient in the chest drain group (p-value < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Pleural vent can be a safe and effective alternative to conventional chest drain for the management of CTGB-related pneumothorax which allows patients to be managed on an outpatient basis with reduced hospital stays and lower associated healthcare costs.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of pleural vent for CTGB-related pneumothorax.
METHODS: We retrospectively analysed electronic hospital records of patients requiring intervention for pneumothorax following CTGB. All patients treated with pleural vent over a 2-year period (August 2017-July 2019) were included and compared to a control group of all patients treated with chest drain over a previous 2-year period (August 2014-July 2016).
RESULTS: Patients managed with a pleural vent had a shorter length of hospital stay compared to the chest drain group (median 0 days vs 4.5 days, p < 0.01). The mean cost of follow-up in the pleural vent group was £530.36 per patient compared to a mean of £2699.38 per patient in the chest drain group (p-value < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Pleural vent can be a safe and effective alternative to conventional chest drain for the management of CTGB-related pneumothorax which allows patients to be managed on an outpatient basis with reduced hospital stays and lower associated healthcare costs.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of pleural vent for CTGB-related pneumothorax.