CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT04863989Updated Apr 28, 2021

Emergency Small vs Large Tube Thoracostomy in Chest Trauma Patients.

An interventional study of tube thoracostomy in Traumatic Pneumothorax and Hemothorax, sponsored by Assiut University. Status unknown. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-04-28.

Sponsored by Assiut University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Apr 2021), so the status shown — last known as Not yet recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
100
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

To compare between small sized tube thoracostomy and large sized tube thoracostomy regarding the need for another chest tube for the fear of obstruction (in hemomothorax) or ineffective drainage (in hemothorax, pneumothorax or hemo-pneumothorax) ,pain score or repositioning and need for thoracotomy.

Read the detailed description

To evacuate abnormal fluid and air, chest tubes are placed in the pleural space, either surgically or percutaneously. Therapeutic drainage of pleural conditions such as pneumothorax, hemothorax, empyema, chylothorax, and malignant effusions, as well as prophylaxis drainage of air, blood, and other fluids after chest surgery are the indications for chest tubes.

Closed water-seal chest drainage has been described in 1875 by Gotthard Bülau to treat an empyema, as an alternative to the standard rib resection and open tube drainage in the acute phase or rib excision (saucerization) in the chronic phase.

Bülau emphasized the necessity of negative intrapleural pressure for re-expansion of a collapsed lung in the setting of thoracic empyema although most surgeons in his time attributed deaths from thoracic empyema to infection and not superimposed respiratory compromise due to open pneumothorax .

He understood that closed water seal drainage could facilitate lung re-expansion via the patient's natural respiratory movements. Unfortunately, until mechanical ventilation was introduced, application of these principles was limited to the treatment of thoracic empyema.

During both the Second World War and the Korean one lung function restoration was the primary goal of thoracic wound treatment: emergency tube thoracostomy became extremely frequent in haemothorax and tension pneumothorax treatment. For the first time the drain was connected to a two-bottle water seal suction system since 1952 , synthetic ones, more flexible and easy to place, replaced metal tubes and modern three chamber thoracic drain, for a more efficient suction, were employed. New, flexible and plastic drains were widely used by the 1980s, they ranged between 6 and 40 French (F) in size. Since it was believed that smaller drains were less effective in adult medicine, being more prone to the risk of obstruction, the smaller ones (≤20 F) were commonly used in children, the bigger in adults,. In the last two decades, small-bore chest tubes (SBCT) have gained increasing popularity In traumatic pneumothorax or hemothorax the optimal tube size for an emergent thoracostomy is unknown. For the nonemergent management of patients with traumatic pneumothorax or hemothorax both small catheter tube thoracostomy and large-bore chest tube thoracostomy have been shown to work.

In stable trauma patients small catheter tube thoracostomy is effective and comparable with large catheter tube thoracostomy in managing chest trauma.

While the available evidence suggests that in resolving traumatic haemothoraces without additional complications small bore drains may be as effective as large bore drains, there is insufficient evidence currently available to recommend a change to standard practice (ie, large bore drains).

Inaba K , et al, 2012 concluded that chest tube size did not impact the clinically relevant outcomes tested for injured patients with chest trauma. There was no difference in the efficacy of drainage, need for additional tube drainage, or invasive procedures and rate of complications including retained hemothorax. Pain felt by patients at the site of insertion was not affected by tube size.

Most occurrences of traumatic pneumothorax (PTX) and hemothorax (HTX) can be managed non-operatively by means of chest tube thoracostomy. Although most guidelines for chest trauma recommend a large-bore chest tube, e.g., the 9th edition of the ATLSTM (Advanced Trauma Life Support) program recommends a 36 or 40 Fr tube, and the JATECTM (Japan Advanced Trauma Evaluation and Care) course recommends a 28 Fr or larger tube and choosing the tube size based on the patient's physique, these recommendations are mainly based on traditional clinical habits. These large-bore chest tubes may cause pain related to the insertion site and discomfort, especially in conscious patients. Smaller tubes were reported to reduce the pain associated with the tube insertion site in patients with pleural infection.

02

Conditions studied

  • Traumatic Pneumothorax and Hemothorax
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • all chest trauma patients with significant hemothorax, pneumothorax or combined hemo-pneumothorax

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • any chest trauma patients undergoing thoracotomy or thoracic surgery for any other reason for example : diaphragmatic tear,flail chest or sternal fracture
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
100 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Small sized chest tube

    Insertion of small sized chest tube in patients with traumatic hemothorax, pneumothorax or hemopneumothorax.

    Procedure: tube thoracostomy

  • Active comparator
    Large sized chest tube

    insertion of large sized chest tube in patients with traumatic hemothorax, pneumothorax or hemopneumothorax.

    Procedure: tube thoracostomy

Interventions

  • Proceduretube thoracostomy

    insertion of intercostal tube for drainage of traumatic hemothorax or pneumothorax

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. To compare the number of patients who will have emergent small sized tube thoracostomy and large sized tube thoracostomy regarding the need for another chest tube.

    To compare the number of patients who will have emergent small sized tube thoracostomy and large sized tube thoracostomy regarding the need for another chest tube.

    Time frame: baseline

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of trauma patients who will have emergent small vs large thoracostomy tube regarding pain score

    Number of trauma patients who will have emergent small vs large thoracostomy tube regarding pain score

    Time frame: baseline

  2. Number of trauma patients who will have emergent small vs large thoracostomy tube regarding duration of tube insertion.

    Number of trauma patients who will have emergent small vs large thoracostomy tube regarding duration of tube insertion.

    Time frame: baseline

06

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

07

References and documents

Publications

  • Cooke DT, David EA. Large-bore and small-bore chest tubes: types, function, and placement. Thorac Surg Clin. 2013 Feb;23(1):17-24, v. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2012.10.006. PubMed 23206714 ↗
  • Meyer JA. Gotthard Bulau and closed water-seal drainage for empyema, 1875-1891. Ann Thorac Surg. 1989 Oct;48(4):597-9. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(10)66876-2. PubMed 2679468 ↗
  • Van Schil PE. Thoracic drainage and the contribution of Gotthard Bulau. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997 Dec;64(6):1876. No abstract available. PubMed 9436605 ↗
  • Monaghan SF, Swan KG. Tube thoracostomy: the struggle to the "standard of care". Ann Thorac Surg. 2008 Dec;86(6):2019-22. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.08.006. PubMed 19022041 ↗
  • HOWE BE Jr. Evaluation of chest suction with an artificial thorax. Surg Forum. 1951:1-7. No abstract available. PubMed 14931188 ↗
  • Miller KS, Sahn SA. Chest tubes. Indications, technique, management and complications. Chest. 1987 Feb;91(2):258-64. doi: 10.1378/chest.91.2.258. No abstract available. PubMed 3542404 ↗
  • Filosso PL, Sandri A, Guerrera F, Ferraris A, Marchisio F, Bora G, Costardi L, Solidoro P, Ruffini E, Oliaro A. When size matters: changing opinion in the management of pleural space-the rise of small-bore pleural catheters. J Thorac Dis. 2016 Jul;8(7):E503-10. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2016.06.25. PubMed 27499983 ↗
  • Tanizaki S, Maeda S, Sera M, Nagai H, Hayashi M, Azuma H, Kano KI, Watanabe H, Ishida H. Small tube thoracostomy (20-22 Fr) in emergent management of chest trauma. Injury. 2017 Sep;48(9):1884-1887. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.06.021. Epub 2017 Jun 23. PubMed 28673640 ↗
  • Rivera L, O'Reilly EB, Sise MJ, Norton VC, Sise CB, Sack DI, Swanson SM, Iman RB, Paci GM, Antevil JL. Small catheter tube thoracostomy: effective in managing chest trauma in stable patients. J Trauma. 2009 Feb;66(2):393-9. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e318173f81e. PubMed 19204512 ↗
  • Towards evidence-based emergency medicine: best BETs from the Manchester Royal Infirmary. BET 4: does size matter? Chest drains in haemothorax following trauma. Emerg Med J. 2013 Nov;30(11):965-7. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2013-203139.4. PubMed 24142946 ↗
  • Inaba K, Lustenberger T, Recinos G, Georgiou C, Velmahos GC, Brown C, Salim A, Demetriades D, Rhee P. Does size matter? A prospective analysis of 28-32 versus 36-40 French chest tube size in trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012 Feb;72(2):422-7. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3182452444. PubMed 22327984 ↗
  • ATLS Subcommittee; American College of Surgeons' Committee on Trauma; International ATLS working group. Advanced trauma life support (ATLS(R)): the ninth edition. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013 May;74(5):1363-6. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31828b82f5. No abstract available. PubMed 23609291 ↗
08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04863989
Lead sponsor
Assiut University
Responsible party
Amr Mohamed Mamdouh Hussein (resident, Assiut University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 28, 2021
Start date
Sep 2021 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 2022 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 2022 (estimated)
Last update
Apr 28, 2021

Study contacts

amr mohamed mamdouh, resident
Contact
amrmamdouh_95@yahoo.com
+201000566770
hussein elkhayat, assistant professor
Contact
Elkhayat@aun.edu.eg
+201005549653

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Apr 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion