Intra-pleural fibrinolytic therapy versus placebo, or a different fibrinolytic agent, in the treatment of adult parapneumonic effusions and empyema.

BACKGROUND: Pleural infection, including parapneumonic effusions and thoracic empyema, may complicate lower respiratory tract infections. Standard treatment of these collections in adults involves antibiotic therapy, effective drainage of infected fluid and surgical intervention if conservative management fails. Intrapleural fibrinolytic agents such as streptokinase and alteplase have been hypothesised to improve fluid drainage in complicated parapneumonic effusions and empyema and therefore improve treatment outcomes and prevent the need for thoracic surgical intervention. Intrapleural fibrinolytic agents have been used in combination with DNase, but this is beyond the scope of this review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of adding intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy to standard conservative therapy (intercostal catheter drainage and antibiotic therapy) in the treatment of complicated parapneumonic effusions and empyema. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal. We contacted trial authors for further information and requested details regarding the possibility of unpublished trials. The most recent search was conducted on 28 August 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with post-pneumonic empyema or complicated parapneumonic effusions (excluding tuberculous effusions) who had not had prior surgical intervention or trauma comparing an intrapleural fibrinolytic agent (streptokinase, alteplase or urokinase) versus placebo or a comparison of two fibrinolytic agents. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data. We contacted study authors for further information. We used odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data and reported 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures of meta-analysis. We applied the GRADE approach to summarise results and to assess the overall certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included in this review a total of 12 RCTs. Ten studies assessed fibrinolytic agents versus placebo (993 participants); one study compared streptokinase with urokinase (50 participants); and one compared alteplase versus urokinase (99 participants). The primary outcomes were death, requirement for surgical intervention, overall treatment failure and serious adverse effects. All studies were in the inpatient setting. Outcomes were measured at varying time points from hospital discharge to three months. Seven trials were at low or unclear risk of bias and two at high risk of bias due to inadequate randomisation and inappropriate study design respectively. We found no evidence of difference in overall mortality with fibrinolytic versus placebo (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.91; 8 studies, 867 participants; I² = 0%; moderate certainty of evidence). We found evidence of a reduction in surgical intervention with fibrinolysis in the same studies (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.68; 8 studies, 897 participants; I² = 51%; low certainty of evidence); and overall treatment failure (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.58; 7 studies, 769 participants; I² = 88%; very low certainty of evidence, with evidence of significant heterogeneity). We found no clear evidence of an increase in adverse effects with intrapleural fibrinolysis, although this cannot be excluded (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.36 to 4.57; low certainty of evidence). In a sensitivity analysis, the reduction in referrals for surgery and overall treatment failure with fibrinolysis disappeared when the analysis was confined to studies at low or unclear risk of bias. In a moderate-risk population (baseline 14% risk of death, 20% risk of surgery, 27% risk of treatment failure), intra-pleural fibrinolysis leads to 19 more deaths (36 fewer to 59 more), 115 fewer surgical interventions (150 fewer to 55 fewer) and 214 fewer overall treatment failures (252 fewer to 93 fewer) per 1000 people. A single study of streptokinase versus urokinase found no clear difference between the treatments for requirement for surgery (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 7.72; 50 participants; low-certainty evidence). A single study of alteplase versus urokinase showed no clear difference in requirement for surgery (OR alteplase versus urokinase 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.24) but an increased rate of adverse effects, primarily bleeding, with alteplase (OR 5.61, 95% CI 1.16 to 27.11; 99 participants; low-certainty evidence). This translated into 154 (6 to 499 more) serious adverse events with alteplase compared with urokinase per 1000 people treated. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In patients with complicated infective pleural effusion or empyema, intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy was associated with a reduction in the requirement for surgical intervention and overall treatment failure but with no evidence of change in mortality. Discordance between the negative largest trial of this therapy and other studies is of concern, however, as is an absence of significant effect when analysing low risk of bias trials only. The reasons for this difference are uncertain but may include publication bias. Intrapleural fibrinolytics may increase the rate of serious adverse events, but the evidence is insufficient to confirm or exclude this possibility.

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: current and future treatment options.

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic condition of unknown etiology with an unfavorable outcome from progressively deteriorating respiratory function, leading ultimately to death from respiratory failure. It is characterized by sequential acute lung injury resulting in progressive fixed tissue fibrosis, architectural distortion and loss of function. An excess of profibrotic cytokines and/or a deficiency in antifibrotic cytokines have been implicated in the pathological process as has excessive oxidation. IPF is distinguished from other forms of diffuse pulmonary fibrosis by the presence of the specific histological pattern of usual interstitial pneumonitis. Oral corticosteroids are the usual treatment, but objective response rates are poor and good quality studies do not exist. Other therapies either alone or in combination with corticosteroids are widely used, including azathioprine, colchicine, cyclophosphamide and penicillamine. There is a paucity of good quality information regarding the effectiveness of most noncorticosteroid immunosuppressive agents. Older studies of lesser methodological quality have shown benefits from these drugs, generally when added to corticosteroids. Many were retrospective reviews or uncontrolled, nonrandomized, open-label, prospective studies and often included other histological patterns of disease which are now thought to respond better to immunosuppressive agents. The results of intervention with colchicine and azathioprine have been disappointing when assessed by good quality trials using modern diagnostic criteria. Modern high quality studies are lacking for several agents, notably cyclophosphamide and penicillamine. The older agents may yet prove to be effective but further good quality trials will be necessary to assess these agents adequately. Other new anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antifibrotic or anticytokine compounds are largely untried or unreported. One trial using interferon-gamma-1b showed a significant improvement in pulmonary function but there are concerns regarding the generalizability of this study. Pirfenidone, cyclosporine and acetylcysteine may also prove to be of benefit but current studies are of insufficient quality to allow for any conclusions to be drawn. Currently there is no good evidence to support the routine use of oral corticosteroids, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, penicillamine, colchicine, cyclosporine or any other immunosuppressive, antifibrotic or immunomodulatory agent in the management of IPF. Interferon, pirfenidone and other new agents may be of benefit but further studies are required. Any recommendations for treatment must therefore be made on an individual and empiric basis. As some other forms of pulmonary fibrosis may respond better to immunosuppressive agents, it remains important to make an accurate diagnosis, by open lung biopsy if necessary.