CClinicalTrials.gg
Enrolling by invitationNCT04954625Updated Oct 10, 2025

Prolonged Air Leak (PAL) Autologous Blood Patch Intervention Trial

An interventional study of Autologous Blood Patch and Standard of Care (per Physician) in Lung Cancer, sponsored by Rush University Medical Center. Enrolling by invitation at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-10-10.

Sponsored by Rush University Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

A postoperative autologous blood patch (ABP) intervention trial for patients who underwent lung resection for cancer to examine its effectiveness in preventing a prolonged air leak.

AIM 1: To determine the safety and efficacy of autologous blood patch (ABP) as a means to reduce the rate of prolonged air leak (PAL) after lung cancer resection

AIM 2: To prospectively examine variation in morbidity and quality of life between patients with and without a PAL

Read the detailed description

The plan for this trial is to establish the safety and efficacy of ABP as a means of reducing PAL following lung cancer resection. Patients with an air leak on the morning of postoperative day 3 after elective lung resection for cancer will be randomized to ABP on postoperative day 3 and day 4 (if an air leak remains present), or standard care (n=60 per arm). This will be a multi-institutional randomized, controlled trial open for enrollment at centers in the United States and Canada. The study methods and design are compliant with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT).

Subjects will be consented on postoperative day 3, with autologous blood patch intervention occurring on day 3 or day 4. If subjects are randomized to the ABP arm of the trial, they will receive 60-100 ml of autologous blood sterilely drawn from a peripheral vein and immediately instilled into the chest tube.

Subjects will then follow up either in clinic or via telephone to answer the questionnaire. If the subject is being seen in person, they will be handed a questionnaire form to complete. This form will be kept and stored as source documentation. If the patient is answering the questionnaire via telephone, the study team personnel will record their answers on the questionnaire form, indicating it was completed by the subject but recorded by study team personnel. A telephone encounter note will be recorded and stored as source with the completed questionnaire. Follow up occurs at 30 days (+/-5 days) postoperatively.

02

Conditions studied

  • Lung Cancer

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Surgery
  • Prolonged Air Leak
  • Autologous Blood Patch
  • Lung
03

In context

Lung Neoplasms

7,243 studies on the registry are indexed under Lung Neoplasms; 1,557 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 60 is close to the median of 60 across 5,295 interventional studies indexed under Lung Neoplasms.

Browse Lung Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Rush University Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 394 studies on the registry; 61 are open to participants now.

Of its 30 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 25 (83%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients who underwent elective wedge resection, segmentectomy, lobectomy, or bilobectomy for suspected non-small cell lung cancer
  • Patients that have reviewed and signed the Informed Consent Form, had an opportunity to ask questions, and consent to have their de-identified data included in the study
  • Patients who have an air leak on the morning of postoperative Day 3
  • Age ≥18 years old

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients who undergo pneumonectomy, sleeve lobectomy, chest wall or diaphragm resection, or bilateral procedures.
  • Age \< 18 years old
  • Women who are pregnant
05

Study design

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

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Autologous Blood Patch

    60-120ml of patient's blood will be drawn and inserted into patient's chest tube. A minimum of 60ml of blood is required, with the optimal amount of blood being 120ml.

    Procedure: Autologous Blood Patch

  • Active comparator
    Standard of Care (Per physician)

    Chest tube remains intact without blood patch.

    Procedure: Standard of Care (per Physician)

Interventions

  • ProcedureAutologous Blood Patch

    All patients will be assessed on the morning of postoperative Day 3 and 4 for the presence of an air leak. If an air leak is present, 60-100 ml of autologous blood will be drawn from a peripheral vein and immediately instilled into the chest tube. The individual who draws blood is that the discretion of the site principal investigator. The tubing will be elevated over an IV pole while the patient remains in bed, moving position every 15 minutes for 1 hour to distribute the blood throughout the pleural cavity. The tubing support will then be removed, allowing the chest tube to drain. After ABP intervention, the chest tube will remain to water seal, as long as the patient tolerates it.

  • ProcedureStandard of Care (per Physician)

    Patients randomized to Standard of Care will be treated as their surgeon would as routine. This may mean postoperative observation, of another type of intervention.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Prolonged Air Leak >5 days

    Definition of prolonged air leak: air leak present at 5 days or greater

    Time frame: Within 30 Days

  2. Hospital Length of Stay

    Number of days patient was admitted inpatient

    Time frame: Within 30 Days

  3. Readmission within 30 days

    Determination of whether the patient was readmitted after discharge within 30 days.

    Time frame: Within 30 Days

  4. In hospital mortality

    Survival status while inpatient.

    Time frame: Within 30 Days

  5. 30-day Mortality

    Survival status within 30 days consent.

    Time frame: Within 30 Days

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Rush University Medical Center
    Chicago, Illinois 60612, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999-2013 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute; 2017. Available at: www.cdc.gov/uscs
  • Stephan F, Boucheseiche S, Hollande J, Flahault A, Cheffi A, Bazelly B, Bonnet F. Pulmonary complications following lung resection: a comprehensive analysis of incidence and possible risk factors. Chest. 2000 Nov;118(5):1263-70. doi: 10.1378/chest.118.5.1263. PubMed 11083673 ↗
  • Brunelli A, Monteverde M, Borri A, Salati M, Marasco RD, Fianchini A. Predictors of prolonged air leak after pulmonary lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004 Apr;77(4):1205-10; discussion 1210. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2003.10.082. PubMed 15063235 ↗
  • Isowa N, Hasegawa S, Bando T, Wada H. Preoperative risk factors for prolonged air leak following lobectomy or segmentectomy for primary lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2002 May;21(5):951. doi: 10.1016/s1010-7940(02)00076-3. No abstract available. PubMed 12062302 ↗
  • Liang S, Ivanovic J, Gilbert S, Maziak DE, Shamji FM, Sundaresan RS, Seely AJE. Quantifying the incidence and impact of postoperative prolonged alveolar air leak after pulmonary resection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Apr;145(4):948-954. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.08.044. Epub 2012 Sep 13. PubMed 22982031 ↗
  • Gilbert S, Maghera S, Seely AJ, Maziak DE, Shamji FM, Sundaresan SR, Villeneuve PJ. Identifying Patients at Higher Risk of Prolonged Air Leak After Lung Resection. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Nov;102(5):1674-1679. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.05.035. Epub 2016 Jul 22. PubMed 27457828 ↗
  • Attaar A, Winger DG, Luketich JD, Schuchert MJ, Sarkaria IS, Christie NA, Nason KS. A clinical prediction model for prolonged air leak after pulmonary resection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017 Mar;153(3):690-699.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.10.003. Epub 2016 Oct 14. PubMed 27912898 ↗
  • Lee L, Hanley SC, Robineau C, Sirois C, Mulder DS, Ferri LE. Estimating the risk of prolonged air leak after pulmonary resection using a simple scoring system. J Am Coll Surg. 2011 Jun;212(6):1027-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.03.010. Epub 2011 Apr 13. PubMed 21489831 ↗
  • Brunelli A, Varela G, Refai M, Jimenez MF, Pompili C, Sabbatini A, Aranda JL. A scoring system to predict the risk of prolonged air leak after lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010 Jul;90(1):204-9. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.02.054. PubMed 20609776 ↗
  • Rivera C, Bernard A, Falcoz PE, Thomas P, Schmidt A, Benard S, Vicaut E, Dahan M. Characterization and prediction of prolonged air leak after pulmonary resection: a nationwide study setting up the index of prolonged air leak. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011 Sep;92(3):1062-8; discussion 1068. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.04.033. PubMed 21871301 ↗
  • Stolz AJ, Schutzner J, Lischke R, Simonek J, Pafko P. Predictors of prolonged air leak following pulmonary lobectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005 Feb;27(2):334-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.11.004. PubMed 15691692 ↗
  • Pompili C, Falcoz PE, Salati M, Szanto Z, Brunelli A. A risk score to predict the incidence of prolonged air leak after video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: An analysis from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017 Apr;153(4):957-965. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.11.064. Epub 2016 Dec 22. PubMed 28089646 ↗
  • Varela G, Jimenez MF, Novoa N, Aranda JL. Estimating hospital costs attributable to prolonged air leak in pulmonary lobectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005 Feb;27(2):329-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.11.005. PubMed 15691691 ↗
  • Liberman M, Muzikansky A, Wright CD, Wain JC, Donahue DM, Allan JS, Gaissert HA, Morse CR, Mathisen DJ, Lanuti M. Incidence and risk factors of persistent air leak after major pulmonary resection and use of chemical pleurodesis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010 Mar;89(3):891-7; discussion 897-8. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.12.012. PubMed 20172150 ↗
  • Mueller MR, Marzluf BA. The anticipation and management of air leaks and residual spaces post lung resection. J Thorac Dis. 2014 Mar;6(3):271-84. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2013.11.29. PubMed 24624291 ↗
  • Okereke I, Murthy SC, Alster JM, Blackstone EH, Rice TW. Characterization and importance of air leak after lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005 Apr;79(4):1167-73. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.08.069. PubMed 15797045 ↗
  • Elsayed H, McShane J, Shackcloth M. Air leaks following pulmonary resection for lung cancer: is it a patient or surgeon related problem? Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2012 Sep;94(6):422-7. doi: 10.1308/003588412X13171221592258. PubMed 22943333 ↗
  • Seder CW, Basu S, Ramsay T, Rocco G, Blackmon S, Liptay MJ, Gilbert S. A Prolonged Air Leak Score for Lung Cancer Resection: An Analysis of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019 Nov;108(5):1478-1483. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.05.069. Epub 2019 Jul 16. PubMed 31323209 ↗
  • Rocco G, Brunelli A, Rocco R. Suction or Nonsuction: How to Manage a Chest Tube After Pulmonary Resection. Thorac Surg Clin. 2017 Feb;27(1):35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2016.08.006. PubMed 27865325 ↗
  • Rivas de Andres JJ, Blanco S, de la Torre M. Postsurgical pleurodesis with autologous blood in patients with persistent air leak. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000 Jul;70(1):270-2. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(00)01360-6. PubMed 10921721 ↗
  • Lang-Lazdunski L, Coonar AS. A prospective study of autologous 'blood patch' pleurodesis for persistent air leak after pulmonary resection. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004 Nov;26(5):897-900. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.07.034. PubMed 15519179 ↗
  • Oliveira FH, Cataneo DC, Ruiz RL Jr, Cataneo AJ. Persistent pleuropulmonary air leak treated with autologous blood: results from a university hospital and review of literature. Respiration. 2010;79(4):302-6. doi: 10.1159/000226277. Epub 2009 Jun 24. PubMed 19556743 ↗
  • Athanassiadi K, Bagaev E, Haverich A. Autologous blood pleurodesis for persistent air leak. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009 Dec;57(8):476-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1185913. PubMed 20013622 ↗
  • Shackcloth MJ, Poullis M, Jackson M, Soorae A, Page RD. Intrapleural instillation of autologous blood in the treatment of prolonged air leak after lobectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006 Sep;82(3):1052-6. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.04.015. PubMed 16928534 ↗
  • Chambers A, Routledge T, Bille A, Scarci M. Is blood pleurodesis effective for determining the cessation of persistent air leak? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2010 Oct;11(4):468-72. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2010.234559. Epub 2010 Jul 13. PubMed 20628018 ↗
  • Manley K, Coonar A, Wells F, Scarci M. Blood patch for persistent air leak: a review of the current literature. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2012 Jul;18(4):333-8. doi: 10.1097/MCP.0b013e32835358ca. PubMed 22498731 ↗
  • Cobanoglu U, Melek M, Edirne Y. Autologous blood pleurodesis: A good choice in patients with persistent air leak. Ann Thorac Med. 2009 Oct;4(4):182-6. doi: 10.4103/1817-1737.56011. PubMed 19881163 ↗
  • Cagirici U, Sahin B, Cakan A, Kayabas H, Buduneli T. Autologous blood patch pleurodesis in spontaneous pneumothorax with persistent air leak. Scand Cardiovasc J. 1998;32(2):75-8. doi: 10.1080/14017439850140210. PubMed 9636962 ↗
  • ACS. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2018. Available at https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-andfigures/2018/cancer-facts-and-figures-2018.pdf.
  • National Lung Screening Trial Research Team; Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, Black WC, Clapp JD, Fagerstrom RM, Gareen IF, Gatsonis C, Marcus PM, Sicks JD. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 4;365(5):395-409. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102873. Epub 2011 Jun 29. PubMed 21714641 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 10, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04954625
Lead sponsor
Rush University Medical Center
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 8, 2021
Start date
Jul 1, 2021
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 10, 2025

Study contacts

Christopher Seder, MD
principal investigator · Rush University Medical Center
Sebastien Gilbert, MD
study director · University of Ottawa

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.

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