Journal of Current Surgery, ISSN 1927-1298 print, 1927-1301 online, Open Access |
Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, J Curr Surg and Elmer Press Inc |
Journal website http://www.currentsurgery.org |
Original Article
Volume 6, Number 2, June 2016, pages 52-56
The Pigtail Catheter for Pleural Drainage: A Less Invasive Alternative to Tube Thoracostomy
Figures
Tables
Variable | Pigtail group (n = 57) | ICD group (n = 35) |
---|---|---|
Age (years), mean ± SD | 54.7 ± 16 | 55.4 ± 15 |
Gender | ||
Male | 47 (78.9%) | 26 (74.3%) |
Female | 10 (17.5%) | 9 (25.7%) |
Side of effusion | ||
Right | 29 (50.8%) | 19 (54.3%) |
Left | 28 (49.1%) | 16 (45.71%) |
Diagnosis | ||
TB | 15 (26.31%) | 8 (22.8%) |
Pneumonia | 31 (54.4%) | 21 (60%) |
Malignancy | 9 (15.8%) | 4 (11.4%) |
Undiagnosed | 2 (3.5%) | 2 (5.7%) |
Loculation | ||
Present | 44 (77.1%) | 7 |
Absent | 13 (21.2%) | 28 |
Use of fibrinolysis | ||
Yes | 29 | 16 |
No | 28 | 19 |
Variable | Patients who underwent pigtail (n = 57) | Patients who underwent ICD (n = 35) | P value |
---|---|---|---|
Duration of hospital stay | 13 ± 5.7 | 13.3 ± 8 | 0.982 |
Days taken for total clearance | 9.7 ± 5.7 | 9 ± 5.6 | 0.955 |
Need of surgical intervention | 3 (5.3%) | 5 (14.3%) | 0.134 |
Pain score > 5 | 17 (29.8%) | 23 (65.7%) | < 0.001 |
Good mobility after procedure | 39 (68.4%) | 11 (31.4) | < 0.001 |
Diagnosis | No. | Duration in days | Time for clearance | P value |
---|---|---|---|---|
TB | ||||
Pigtail | 15 | 13.3 ± 5.49 | 9.46 ± 3.96 | 0.160 |
ICD | 8 | 11.6 ± 3.37 | 9.12 ± 4.22 | 0.075 |
Pneumonia | ||||
Pigtail | 31 | 12.2 ± 5.24 | 9 ± 7.25 | 0.774 |
ICD | 21 | 10.47 ± 7.22 | 9 ± 4.22 | 0.486 |
Malignancy | ||||
Pigtail | 9 | 16 ± 7.22 | 10 ± 5.7 | 0.151 |
ICD | 4 | 17 ± 7.63 | 11.5 ± 7.22 | 0.298 |
Others | ||||
Pigtail | 2 | 9.5 ± 0.7 | 6 ± 1.41 | 0.833 |
ICD | 2 | 9.5 ± 0.77 | 6 ± 1.41 | 0.833 |
Study/year/place | No. of patients | Age (years), (mean ± SD) | No. of male (%) | Duration of hospital stay (days), mean ± SD | Time to drainage (days), mean ± SD | Success rate (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Adel Salah et al (2012), Egypt [17] | 51 | 57.27 ± 13.45 | 29 (56.7%) | NA | 5.8 ± 2.4 | 82.4% |
Yi-Heng-Liu et al (2010), China [7] | 276 | 59.21 ± 18.21 | 178 (64.5%) | 29.23 ± 29.6 | 6.1 ± 2 | 72.9% |
Sachin Jain et al (2006), India [18] | 50 | NA | NA | 3 - 12 | 5 - 7 | 92% |
Present study (2013), India | 57 | 54.7 ± 16 | 47 (78.9%) | 13 ± 5.7 | 9.7 ± 5.7 | 94.7% |