-
Respiratory Care Aug 2019Airway management techniques are aimed at reducing complications associated with artificial airways and mechanical ventilation, such as retained secretions. The impact... (Review)
Review
Airway management techniques are aimed at reducing complications associated with artificial airways and mechanical ventilation, such as retained secretions. The impact of airway management techniques on ventilator-associated events (VAEs) varies considerably by modality. Closed-suction techniques are generally recommended but have limited, if any, impact on VAEs. Normal saline instillation during suctioning is not recommended. Devices designed specifically to remove biofilm from the inside of endotracheal tubes appear to be safe, but their role in VAE prevention is uncertain. Subglottic secretion clearance by artificial cough maneuvers is promising, but more research is needed to assess its clinical feasibility. Continuous cuff-pressure management appears to be effective in reducing microaspiration of subglottic secretions.
Topics: Airway Management; Humans; Iatrogenic Disease; Intubation, Intratracheal; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Respiration, Artificial; Suction; Ventilators, Mechanical
PubMed: 31346073
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.07107 -
Respiratory Care Oct 2007Secretion management in the mechanically ventilated patient includes routine methods for maintaining mucociliary function, as well as techniques for secretion removal.... (Review)
Review
Secretion management in the mechanically ventilated patient includes routine methods for maintaining mucociliary function, as well as techniques for secretion removal. Humidification, mobilization of the patient, and airway suctioning are all routine procedures for managing secretions in the ventilated patient. Early ambulation of the post-surgical patient and routine turning of the ventilated patient are common secretion-management techniques that have little supporting evidence of efficacy. Humidification is a standard of care and a requisite for secretion management. Both active and passive humidification can be used. The humidifier selected and the level of humidification required depend on the patient's condition and the expected duration of intubation. In patients with thick, copious secretions, heated humidification is superior to a heat and moisture exchanger. Airway suctioning is the most important secretion removal technique. Open-circuit and closed-circuit suctioning have similar efficacy. Instilling saline prior to suctioning, to thin the secretions or stimulate a cough, is not supported by the literature. Adequate humidification and as-needed suctioning are the foundation of secretion management in the mechanically ventilated patient. Intermittent therapy for secretion removal includes techniques either to simulate a cough, to mechanically loosen secretions, or both. Patient positioning for secretion drainage is also widely used. Percussion and postural drainage have been widely employed for mechanically ventilated patients but have not been shown to reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia or atelectasis. Manual hyperinflation and insufflation-exsufflation, which attempt to improve secretion removal by simulating a cough, have been described in mechanically ventilated patients, but neither has been studied sufficiently to support routine use. Continuous lateral rotation with a specialized bed reduces atelectasis in some patients, but has not been shown to improve secretion removal. Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation combines percussion with hyperinflation and a simulated cough, but the evidence for intrapulmonary percussive ventilation in mechanically ventilated patients is insufficient to support routine use. Secretion management in the mechanically ventilated patient consists of appropriate humidification and as-needed airway suctioning. Intermittent techniques may play a role when secretion retention persists despite adequate humidification and suctioning. The technique selected should remedy the suspected etiology of the secretion retention (eg, insufflation-exsufflation for impaired cough). Further research into secretion management in the mechanically ventilated patient is needed.
Topics: Cough; Humans; Humidity; Mucus; Respiration Disorders; Respiration, Artificial; Suction
PubMed: 17894902
DOI: No ID Found -
Respiratory Care Jun 2010An electronic literature search for articles published between January 1990 and October 2009 was conducted by using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. The...
An electronic literature search for articles published between January 1990 and October 2009 was conducted by using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. The update of this clinical practice guideline is the result of reviewing a total of 114 clinical trials, 62 reviews and 6 meta-analyses on endotracheal suctioning. The following recommendations are made following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria: (1) It is recommended that endotracheal suctioning should be performed only when secretions are present, and not routinely; (2) It is suggested that pre-oxygenation be considered if the patient has a clinically important reduction in oxygen saturation with suctioning; (3) Performing suctioning without disconnecting the patient from the ventilator is suggested; (4) Use of shallow suction is suggested instead of deep suction, based on evidence from infant and pediatric studies; (5) It is suggested that routine use of normal saline instillation prior to endotracheal suction should not be performed; (6) The use of closed suction is suggested for adults with high F(I)O2, or PEEP, or at risk for lung de-recruitment, and for neonates; (7) Endotracheal suctioning without disconnection (closed system) is suggested in neonates; (8) Avoidance of disconnection and use of lung recruitment maneuvers are suggested if suctioning-induced lung de-recruitment occurs in patients with ; (9) It is suggested that a suction catheter is used that occludes less than 50% the lumen of the endotracheal tube in children and adults, and less than 70% in infants; (10) It is suggested that the duration of the suctioning event be limited to less than 15 seconds.
Topics: Humans; Intubation, Intratracheal; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Respiration, Artificial; Suction
PubMed: 20507660
DOI: No ID Found -
Medicine Jan 2024Thoracentesis is performed by 4 methods: gravity, manual aspiration, vacuum-bottle suction, and wall suction. This literature review investigates the safety of these... (Review)
Review
Thoracentesis is performed by 4 methods: gravity, manual aspiration, vacuum-bottle suction, and wall suction. This literature review investigates the safety of these techniques and determines if there is significant difference in complication rates. A comprehensive literature search revealed 6 articles studying thoracentesis techniques and their complication rates, reviewing 20,815 thoracenteses: 80 (0.4%) by gravity, 9431 (45.3%) by manual aspiration, 3498 (16.8%) by vacuum-bottle suction, 7580 (36.4%) by wall suction and 226 (1.1%) unspecified. Of the 6 studies, 2 were smaller with 100 and 140 patients respectively. Overall, there was a 4.4% complication rate including hemothoraces, pneumothoraces, re-expansion pulmonary edema (REPE), chest discomfort, bleeding at the site, pain, and vasovagal episodes. The pneumothorax and REPE rate was 2.5%. Sub-analyzed by each method, there was a 47.5% (38/80) complication rate in the gravity group, 1.2% (115/9431) in the manual aspiration group including 0.7% pneumothorax or REPE, 8% (285/3498) in the vacuum-bottle group including 3.7% pneumothorax or REPE, 4% (309/7580) in the wall suction group all of which were either pneumothorax or REPE, and 73% (166/226) in the unspecified group most of which were vasovagal episodes. Procedure duration was less in the suction groups versus gravity drainage. The 2 smaller studies indicated that in the vacuum groups, early procedure termination rate from respiratory failure was significantly higher than non-vacuum techniques. Significant complication rate from thoracentesis by any technique is low. Suction drainage was noted to have a lower procedure time. Symptom-limited thoracentesis is safe using vacuum or wall suction even with large volumes drained. Other factors such as procedure duration, quantity of fluid removed, number of needle passes, patients' BMI, and operator technique may have more of an impact on complication rate than drainage modality. All suction modalities of drainage seem to be safe. Operator technique, attention to symptom development, amount of fluid removed, and intrapleural pressure changes may be important in predicting complication development, and therefore, may be useful in choosing which technique to employ. Specific drainage modes and their complications need to be further studied.
Topics: Humans; Thoracentesis; Pneumothorax; Thoracic Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Suction; Pulmonary Edema; Respiratory Aspiration
PubMed: 38181250
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036850 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2011The incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax is 24/100,000 a year in men and 9.9/100,000 a year in women in England and Wales. The major contributing factor is smoking,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax is 24/100,000 a year in men and 9.9/100,000 a year in women in England and Wales. The major contributing factor is smoking, which increases the likelihood by 22 times in men, and by 8 times in women. While death from spontaneous pneumothorax is rare, rates of recurrence are high, with one study of men in the USA finding a total recurrence rate of 35%.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people presenting with spontaneous pneumothorax? What are the effects of interventions to prevent recurrence in people with previous spontaneous pneumothorax? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to January 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 17 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: chest-tube drainage (alone or plus suction), chest tubes (small, standard sizes, one-way valves), needle aspiration, and pleurodesis.
Topics: Chest Tubes; Drainage; Humans; Pleurodesis; Pneumothorax; Prospective Studies; Recurrence; Suction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 21477390
DOI: No ID Found -
Thoracic Surgery Clinics Feb 2017There is scant evidence on the management of chest tubes after surgery for pneumothorax. Most of the current knowledge is extrapolated from studies performed on subjects... (Review)
Review
There is scant evidence on the management of chest tubes after surgery for pneumothorax. Most of the current knowledge is extrapolated from studies performed on subjects with lung cancer. This article reviews the existing literature with particular focus on the effect of suction and no suction on the duration of air leak after lung resection and surgery for pneumothorax. Moreover, the role of regulated suction, which seems to provide some benefit in reducing pneumothorax recurrence after bullectomy and pleurodesis, is discussed. Finally, a personal view on the management of chest tubes after surgery for pneumothorax is provided.
Topics: Chest Tubes; Humans; Lung; Pleurodesis; Pneumothorax; Postoperative Care; Suction
PubMed: 27865323
DOI: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2016.08.004 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Sep 2021Acute appendicitis is one of the most frequent abdominal surgical emergencies. Intra-abdominal abscess is a frequent post-operative complication. The aim of this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute appendicitis is one of the most frequent abdominal surgical emergencies. Intra-abdominal abscess is a frequent post-operative complication. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare peritoneal irrigation and suction versus suction only when performing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.
METHODS
According to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted and registered into the Prospero register (CRD42020186848). The risk of bias was defined to be from low to moderate.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies (9 RCTs and 8 CCTs) were selected, including 5315 patients. There was no statistical significance in post-operative intra-abdominal abscess in open (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.75-2.15; I = 74%) and laparoscopic group (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.73-3.13; I = 83%). No statistical significance in reoperation rate in open (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.04-2.49; I = 18%) and laparoscopic group (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.64-2.49; I = 18%). In both open and laparoscopic groups, operative time was lower in the suction group (RR 7.13, 95% CI 3.14-11.12); no statistical significance was found for hospital stay (MD - 0.39, 95% CI - 1.07 to 0.30; I = 91%) and the rate of wound infection (MD 1.16, 95% CI 0.56-2.38; I = 71%).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review has failed to demonstrate the statistical superiority of employing intra-operative peritoneal irrigation and suction over suction-only to reduce the rate of post-operative complications after appendectomy, but all the articles report clinical superiority in terms of post-operative abscess, wound infection and operative times in suction-only group.
Topics: Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Humans; Peritoneal Lavage; Postoperative Complications; Suction
PubMed: 34488825
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-021-00391-y -
BMC Cancer Aug 2020Seroma formation is a common complication after breast cancer surgery and can lead to delayed wound healing, infection, patient discomfort and repeated visits to the...
A single-center, randomized, non-inferiority study evaluating seroma formation after mastectomy combined with flap fixation with or without suction drainage: protocol for the Seroma reduction and drAin fRee mAstectomy (SARA) trial.
BACKGROUND
Seroma formation is a common complication after breast cancer surgery and can lead to delayed wound healing, infection, patient discomfort and repeated visits to the outpatient clinic. Mastectomy combined with flap fixation is becoming standard practice and is currently combined with closed-suction drainage. There is evidence showing that closed-suction drainage may be insufficient in preventing seroma formation. There is reasonable doubt whether there is still place for closed-suction drainage after mastectomy when flap fixation is performed. We hypothesize that mastectomy combined with flap fixation and closed suction drainage does not cause a significant lower incidence of seroma aspirations, when compared to mastectomy and flap fixation alone. Furthermore, we expect that patients without drainage will experience significantly less discomfort and comparable rates of surgical site infections.
METHODS
This is a randomized controlled trial in female breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and flap fixation using sutures with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Patients will be eligible for inclusion if they are older than 18 years, have an indication for mastectomy with or without sentinel procedure. Exclusion criteria are modified radical mastectomy, direct breast reconstruction, previous history of radiation therapy of the unilateral breast, breast conserving therapy and inability to give informed consent. A total of 250 patients will be randomly allocated to one of two groups: mastectomy combined with flap fixation and closed-suction drainage or mastectomy combined with flap fixation without drainage. Follow-up will be conducted up to six months postoperatively. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients undergoing one or more seroma aspirations. Secondary outcome measures consist of the number of invasive interventions, surgical site infection, quality of life measured using the SF-12 Health Survey, cosmesis, pain and number of additional outpatient department visits.
DISCUSSION
To our knowledge, no randomized controlled trial has been conducted comparing flap fixation with and without closed-suction drainage with seroma aspiration as the primary outcome. This study could result in finding evidence that supports performing mastectomy without closed-suction drainage.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This trial was approved by the medical ethical committee of Zuyderland Medical Center METC-Z on 20 March 2019 (METCZ20190023). The SARA Trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as per July 2019, Identifier: NCT04035590 .
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Netherlands; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Postoperative Complications; Sample Size; Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy; Seroma; Suction; Surgical Flaps; Suture Techniques; Equivalence Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32767988
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07242-0 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Mar 2008The incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax is 24/100,000 a year in men and 9.9/100,000 in women in England and Wales. The major contributing factor is smoking, which... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of spontaneous pneumothorax is 24/100,000 a year in men and 9.9/100,000 in women in England and Wales. The major contributing factor is smoking, which increases the likelihood by 22 times in men, and by 8 times in women. While death from spontaneous pneumothorax is rare, rates of recurrence are high, with one study of men in the US finding a total recurrence rate of 35%.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people presenting with spontaneous pneumothorax? What are the effects of interventions to prevent recurrence in people with previous spontaneous pneumothorax? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to April 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 16 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: chest-tube drainage (alone or plus suction), chest tubes (small, standard sizes, one-way valves), needle aspiration, and pleurodesis.
Topics: Chest Tubes; Drainage; Humans; Pleurodesis; Pneumothorax; Prospective Studies; Recurrence; Smoking; Suction
PubMed: 19450320
DOI: No ID Found -
The European Respiratory Journal Nov 2020Thoracentesis using suction is perceived to have increased risk of complications, including pneumothorax and re-expansion pulmonary oedema (REPO). Current guidelines...
BACKGROUND
Thoracentesis using suction is perceived to have increased risk of complications, including pneumothorax and re-expansion pulmonary oedema (REPO). Current guidelines recommend limiting drainage to 1.5 L to avoid REPO. Our purpose was to examine the incidence of complications with symptom-limited drainage of pleural fluid using suction and identify risk factors for REPO.
METHODS
A retrospective cohort study of all adult patients who underwent symptom-limited thoracentesis using suction at our institution between January 1, 2004 and August 31, 2018 was performed, and a total of 10 344 thoracenteses were included.
RESULTS
Pleural fluid ≥1.5 L was removed in 19% of the procedures. Thoracentesis was stopped due to chest discomfort (39%), complete drainage of fluid (37%) and persistent cough (13%). Pneumothorax based on chest radiography was detected in 3.98%, but only 0.28% required intervention. The incidence of REPO was 0.08%. The incidence of REPO increased with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≥3 compounded with ≥1.5 L (0.04-0.54%; 95% CI 0.13-2.06 L). Thoracentesis in those with ipsilateral mediastinal shift did not increase complications, but less fluid was removed (p<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
Symptom-limited thoracentesis using suction is safe even with large volumes. Pneumothorax requiring intervention and REPO are both rare. There were no increased procedural complications in those with ipsilateral mediastinal shift. REPO increased with poor ECOG PS and drainage ≥1.5 L. Symptom-limited drainage using suction without pleural manometry is safe.
Topics: Adult; Drainage; Humans; Pleural Effusion; Pneumothorax; Retrospective Studies; Suction; Thoracentesis
PubMed: 32499336
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02356-2019