Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
To evaluate the efficacy of drainage achieved by thoracoscopy vs tube drainage alone.
To compare clinical outcomes such as length of hospital stay, need for additional procedures, and treatment failure rates between the two drainage methods.
To asses resolution of pleural infection and rates of fluid re-accumulation over follow-up.
To compare safety profiles and complication rates of thoracoscopy versus tube drainage alone
Full description
Empyema is a serious infection characterized by pus accumulation in the pleural space. Effective drainage and treatment is necessary for resolution. Traditionally, intercostal tube placement was standard initial management. However, recent studies have compared outcomes of early medical thoracoscopy or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).
Thoracoscopy enables direct visualization for thorough pleural space cleansing and debridement under direct vision. medical thoracoscopy significantly improved drainage adequacy and reduced treatment failure risks compared to tube drainage alone. Also reported shorter hospital stays and lower complication rates with early thoracoscopy-directed management.
Additional benefits of thoracoscopy include enabling talc pleurodesis for reducing empyema recurrence. thoracoscopy-directed pleurodesis achieved higher long-term success rates than tube drainage followed by pleurodesis. Overall, current evidence indicates medical thoracoscopy provides superior empyema treatment outcomes to conventional tube drainage through optimized drainage and debridement under direct visualization.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
100 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Central trial contact
Hend saleh, MD; Mohamed yassen, MD
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal