RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Prior studies have found no differences in procedural chest discomfort for patients undergoing manual syringe aspiration or drainage with gravity after thoracentesis. However, whether gravity drainage could protect against chest pain due to the larger negative-pressure gradient generated by wall suction has not been investigated. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does wall suction drainage result in more chest discomfort compared with gravity drainage in patients undergoing large-volume thoracentesis? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this multicenter, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial, patients with large free-flowing effusions of ≥ 500 mL were assigned at a 1:1 ratio to wall suction or gravity drainage. Wall suction was performed with a suction system attached to the suction tubing and with vacuum pressure adjusted to full vacuum. Gravity drainage was performed with a drainage bag placed 100 cm below the catheter insertion site and connected via straight tubing. Patients rated chest discomfort on a 100-mm visual analog scale before, during, and after drainage. The primary outcome was postprocedural chest discomfort at 5 min. Secondary outcomes included measures of postprocedure chest discomfort, breathlessness, procedure time, volume of fluid drained, and complication rates. RESULTS: Of the 228 patients initially randomized, 221 were included in the final analysis. The primary outcome of procedural chest discomfort did not differ significantly between the groups (P = .08), nor did the secondary outcomes of postprocedural discomfort and dyspnea. Similar volumes were drained in both groups, but the procedure duration was longer in the gravity arm by approximately 3 min. No differences in rate of pneumothorax or reexpansion pulmonary edema were noted between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Thoracentesis via wall suction and gravity drainage results in similar levels of procedural discomfort and dyspnea improvement. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT05131945; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.
RESUMO
Background: Though decreasing in incidence and mortality in the USA, lung cancer remains the deadliest of all cancers. For a significant number of patients, the emergency department (ED) provides the first pivotal step in lung cancer prevention, diagnosis, and management. As screening recommendations and treatments advance, ED providers must stay up-to-date with the latest lung cancer recommendations. The purpose of this review is to identify the many ways that emergency providers may intersect with the disease spectrum of lung cancer and provide an updated array of knowledge regarding detection, management, complications, and interdisciplinary care. Findings: Lung cancer, encompassing 10-12% of cancer-related emergency department visits and a 66% admission rate, is the most fatal malignancy in both men and women. Most patients presenting to the ED have not seen a primary care provider or undergone screening. Ultimately, half of those with a new lung cancer diagnosis in the ED die within 1 year. Incidental findings on computed tomography are mostly benign, but emergency staff must be aware of the factors that make them high risk. Radiologic presentations range from asymptomatic nodules to diffuse metastatic lesions with predominately pulmonary symptoms, and some may present with extra-thoracic manifestations including neurologic. The short-term prognosis for ED lung cancer patients is worse than that of other malignancies. Screening offers new hope through earlier diagnosis but is underutilized which may be due to racial and socioeconomic disparities. New treatments provide optimism but lead to new complications, some long-term. Multidisciplinary care is essential, and emergency medicine is responsible for the disposition of patients to the appropriate specialists at inpatient and outpatient centers. Conclusion: ED providers are intimately involved in all aspects of lung cancer care. Risk factor modification and referral for lung cancer screening are opportunities to further enhance patient care. In addition, with the advent of newer cancer therapies, ED providers must stay vigilant and up-to-date with all aspects of lung cancer including disparities, staging, symptoms of disease, prognosis, treatment, and therapy-related complications.