Search

Background: Antibiotic choices for pleural infection are uncertain as its bacteriology is poorly described.Methods: Pleural fluid from 434 pleural infections underwent standard culture and a screen for bacteria by amplification and sequencing of bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA gene.Results: Approximately 50% of community-acquired infections were streptococcal, and 20% included anaerobic bacteria. Approximately 60% of hospital-acquired infections included bacteria frequently resistant to antibiotics (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, 25%; Enterobacteriaceae, 18%; Pseudomonas spp., 5%, enterococci, 12%). Mortality was increased in hospital-acquired infection (hospital, 17/36 [47%]; community, 53/304 [17%]; relative risk, 4.24; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-8.69; p < 0.00001; chi(2), 1 df = 17.47) and in gram-negative (10/22 [45%]), S. aureus (15/34 [44%]), or mixed aerobic infections (13/28 [46%]), compared with streptococcal infection (23/137 [17%]) and infection including anaerobic bacteria (10/49 [20%]; p < 0.00001, chi(2), 4 df = 23.35).Conclusion: Pleural infection differs bacteriologically from pneumonia and requires different treatment. Antibiotics for community-acquired infection should treat aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Hospital-acquired, gram-negative S. aureus and mixed aerobic infections have a high mortality rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report two trials describing whether talc pleurodesis with a mean particle size of less than 15 microm ("mixed" talc) produces more lung and systemic inflammation than tetracycline or "graded" talc (most particles < 10 microm were removed). First, 20 patients with malignant effusions received tetracycline or mixed talc. Changes in lung and systemic inflammation from lung clearance scans, oxygen saturations, and C-reactive protein from baseline to 48 hours after pleurodesis were recorded. Lung inflammation (change in isotope clearance, talc -9.26, SD 14.3 vs. tetracycline 4.10, SD 13.8 minutes; difference = -13.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], -26.6 to -0.2; p = 0.05) and systemic inflammation (change in C-reactive protein, talc 198 SD 79.2 vs. tetracycline 74 SD 79.4 microg/L; difference = 124; 95% CI, 50 to 199; p = 0.004) were greater after talc. Second, 48 patients received mixed or graded talc, and gas exchange was assessed from changes in the alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient. Mixed talc worsened gas exchange (oxygen gradient change, mixed 2.17 SD 1.74 kPa, 16.3 13.1 mm Hg vs. graded 0.72 SD 2.46 kPa 5.4 18.5 mm Hg, difference = 1.45; 95% CI, 0.2 to 2.7; p = 0.03) and induced more systemic inflammation than graded talc. We conclude that the routine use of graded talc for pleurodesis would reduce the morbidity of this procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intrapleural fibrinolytic agents are used in the drainage of infected pleural-fluid collections. This use is based on small trials that did not have the statistical power to evaluate accurately important clinical outcomes, including safety. We conducted a trial to clarify the therapeutic role of intrapleural streptokinase.Methods: In this double-blind trial, 454 patients with pleural infection (defined by the presence of purulent pleural fluid or pleural fluid with a pH below 7.2 with signs of infection or by proven bacterial invasion of the pleural space) were randomly assigned to receive either intrapleural streptokinase (250,000 IU twice daily for three days) or placebo. Patients received antibiotics and underwent chest-tube drainage, surgery, and other treatment as part of routine care. The number of patients in the two groups who had died or needed surgical drainage at three months was compared (the primary end point); secondary end points were the rates of death and of surgery (analyzed separately), the radiographic outcome, and the length of the hospital stay.Results: The groups were well matched at baseline. Among the 427 patients who received streptokinase or placebo, there was no significant difference between the groups in the proportion of patients who died or needed surgery (with streptokinase: 64 of 206 patients [31 percent]; with placebo: 60 of 221 [27 percent]; relative risk, 1.14 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.54; P=0.43), a result that excluded a clinically significant benefit of streptokinase. There was no benefit to streptokinase in terms of mortality, rate of surgery, radiographic outcomes, or length of the hospital stay. Serious adverse events (chest pain, fever, or allergy) were more common with streptokinase (7 percent, vs. 3 percent with placebo; relative risk, 2.49 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.98 to 6.36]; P=0.08).Conclusions: The intrapleural administration of streptokinase does not improve mortality, the rate of surgery, or the length of the hospital stay among patients with pleural infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Over 30% of adult patients with pleural infection either die and/or require surgery. There is no robust means of predicting at baseline presentation which patients will suffer a poor clinical outcome. A validated risk prediction score would allow early identification of high-risk patients, potentially directing more aggressive treatment thereafter., Objectives: To prospectively assess a previously described risk score (the RAPID (Renal (urea), Age, fluid Purulence, Infection source, Dietary (albumin)) score) in adults with pleural infection., Methods: Prospective observational cohort study that recruited patients undergoing treatment for pleural infection. RAPID score and risk category were calculated at baseline presentation. The primary outcome was mortality at 3 months; secondary outcomes were mortality at 12 months, length of hospital stay, need for thoracic surgery, failure of medical treatment and lung function at 3 months., Results: Mortality data were available in 542 out of 546 patients recruited (99.3%). Overall mortality was 10% at 3 months (54 out of 542) and 19% at 12 months (102 out of 542). The RAPID risk category predicted mortality at 3 months. Low-risk mortality (RAPID score 0-2): five out of 222 (2.3%, 95% CI 0.9 to 5.7%); medium-risk mortality (RAPID score 3-4): 21 out of 228 (9.2%, 95% CI 6.0 to 13.7%); and high-risk mortality (RAPID score 5-7): 27 out of 92 (29.3%, 95% CI 21.0 to 39.2%). C-statistics for the scores at 3 months and 12 months were 0.78 (95% CI 0.71-0.83) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.72-0.82), respectively., Conclusions: The RAPID score stratifies adults with pleural infection according to increasing risk of mortality and should inform future research directed at improving outcomes in this patient population., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J.P. Corcoran reports grants from the UK Medical Research Council (MRC; grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: I. Psallidas reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study, as well as grants and personal fees from the European Respiratory Society (ERS), outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: S. Gerry has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F. Piccolo has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.F. Koegelenberg has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Saba has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Daneshvar has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: I. Fairbairn has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Heinink has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. West has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A.E. Stanton has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Holme has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.A. Kastelik has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: H. Steer has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N.J. Downer has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Haris has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: E.H. Baker has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.F. Everett has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Pepperell has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Bewick has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L. Yarmus has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F. Maldonado has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: B. Khan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Hart-Thomas has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Hands has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Warwick has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. De Fonseka has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Hassan reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: M. Munavvar has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Guhan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Shahidi has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: Z. Pogson has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L. Dowson has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N.D. Popowicz has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Saba has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N.R. Ward has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.J. Hallifax reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: M. Dobson reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: R. Shaw reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: E.L. Hedley reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: A. Sabia reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: B. Robinson reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: G.S. Collins has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: H.E. Davies has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L-M. Yu has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.F. Miller has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N.A. Maskell has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N.M. Rahman reports grants from the UK MRC (grant number G1001128), during the conduct of the study, as well as personal fees from the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©ERS 2020.)

Background: The evidence base for the treatment of mild obstructive sleep apnoea is limited and definitions of disease severity vary. The MERGE trial investigated the clinical effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure in patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea., Methods: MERGE, a multicentre, parallel, randomised controlled trial enrolled patients (≥18 years to ≤80 years) with mild obstructive sleep apnoea (apnoea-hypopnoea index [AHI] ≥5 to ≤15 events per h using either AASM 2007 or AASM 2012 scoring criteria) from 11 UK sleep centres. Participants were assigned (1:1) to either 3 months of continuous positive airway pressure plus standard care (sleep counselling), or standard care alone, by computer-generated randomisation; neither participants nor researchers were blinded. The primary outcome was a change in the score on the Short Form-36 questionnaire vitality scale in the intention-to-treat population of patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea diagnosed using the American Academy of Sleep Medicine 2012 scoring criteria. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02699463., Findings: Between Nov 28, 2016 and Feb 12, 2019, 301 patients were recruited and randomised. 233 had mild obstructive sleep apnoea using AASM 2012 criteria and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis: 115 were allocated to receive continuous positive airway pressure and 118 to receive standard care. 209 (90%) of these participants completed the trial. The vitality score significantly increased with a treatment effect of a mean of 10·0 points (95% CI 7·2-12·8; p<0·0001) after 3 months of continuous positive airway pressure, compared with standard care alone (9·2 points [6·8 to 11·6] vs -0·8 points [-3·2 to 1·5]). Using the ANCOVA last-observation-carried-forward analysis, a more conservative estimate, the vitality score also significantly increased with a treatment effect of a mean of 7·5 points (95% CI 5·3 to 9·6; p<0·0001) after 3 months of continuous positive airway pressure, compared with standard care alone (7·5 points [6·0 to 9·0] vs 0·0 points [-1·5 to 1·5]). Three serious adverse events occurred (one allocated to the continuous positive airway pressure group) and all were unrelated to the intervention., Interpretation: 3 months of treatment with continuous positive airway pressure improved the quality of life in patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea. These results highlight the need for health-care professionals and providers to consider treatment for patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea., Funding: ResMed Ltd., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Importance: For treatment of malignant pleural effusion, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are avoided because they may reduce pleurodesis efficacy. Smaller chest tubes may be less painful than larger tubes, but efficacy in pleurodesis has not been proven., Objective: To assess the effect of chest tube size and analgesia (NSAIDs vs opiates) on pain and clinical efficacy related to pleurodesis in patients with malignant pleural effusion., Design, Setting, and Participants: A 2×2 factorial phase 3 randomized clinical trial among 320 patients requiring pleurodesis in 16 UK hospitals from 2007 to 2013., Interventions: Patients undergoing thoracoscopy (n = 206; clinical decision if biopsy was required) received a 24F chest tube and were randomized to receive opiates (n = 103) vs NSAIDs (n = 103), and those not undergoing thoracoscopy (n = 114) were randomized to 1 of 4 groups (24F chest tube and opioids [n = 28]; 24F chest tube and NSAIDs [n = 29]; 12F chest tube and opioids [n = 29]; or 12F chest tube and NSAIDs [n = 28])., Main Outcomes and Measures: Pain while chest tube was in place (0- to 100-mm visual analog scale [VAS] 4 times/d; superiority comparison) and pleurodesis efficacy at 3 months (failure defined as need for further pleural intervention; noninferiority comparison; margin, 15%)., Results: Pain scores in the opiate group (n = 150) vs the NSAID group (n = 144) were not significantly different (mean VAS score, 23.8 mm vs 22.1 mm; adjusted difference, -1.5 mm; 95% CI, -5.0 to 2.0 mm; P = .40), but the NSAID group required more rescue analgesia (26.3% vs 38.1%; rate ratio, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3-3.4; P = .003). Pleurodesis failure occurred in 30 patients (20%) in the opiate group and 33 (23%) in the NSAID group, meeting criteria for noninferiority (difference, -3%; 1-sided 95% CI, -10% to ∞; P = .004 for noninferiority). Pain scores were lower among patients in the 12F chest tube group (n = 54) vs the 24F group (n = 56) (mean VAS score, 22.0 mm vs 26.8 mm; adjusted difference, -6.0 mm; 95% CI, -11.7 to -0.2 mm; P = .04) and 12F chest tubes vs 24F chest tubes were associated with higher pleurodesis failure (30% vs 24%), failing to meet noninferiority criteria (difference, -6%; 1-sided 95% CI, -20% to ∞; P = .14 for noninferiority). Complications during chest tube insertion occurred more commonly with 12F tubes (14% vs 24%; odds ratio, 1.91; P = .20)., Conclusions and Relevance: Use of NSAIDs vs opiates resulted in no significant difference in pain scores but was associated with more rescue medication. NSAID use resulted in noninferior rates of pleurodesis efficacy at 3 months. Placement of 12F chest tubes vs 24F chest tubes was associated with a statistically significant but clinically modest reduction in pain but failed to meet noninferiority criteria for pleurodesis efficacy., Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN33288337.

Background: More than 30% of patients with pleural infection either die or require surgery. Drainage of infected fluid is key to successful treatment, but intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy did not improve outcomes in an earlier, large, randomized trial., Methods: We conducted a blinded, 2-by-2 factorial trial in which 210 patients with pleural infection were randomly assigned to receive one of four study treatments for 3 days: double placebo, intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) and DNase, t-PA and placebo, or DNase and placebo. The primary outcome was the change in pleural opacity, measured as the percentage of the hemithorax occupied by effusion, on chest radiography on day 7 as compared with day 1. Secondary outcomes included referral for surgery, duration of hospital stay, and adverse events., Results: The mean (±SD) change in pleural opacity was greater in the t-PA-DNase group than in the placebo group (-29.5±23.3% vs. -17.2±19.6%; difference, -7.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -13.4 to -2.4; P=0.005); the change observed with t-PA alone and with DNase alone (-17.2±24.3 and -14.7±16.4%, respectively) was not significantly different from that observed with placebo. The frequency of surgical referral at 3 months was lower in the t-PA-DNase group than in the placebo group (2 of 48 patients [4%] vs. 8 of 51 patients [16%]; odds ratio for surgical referral, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.87; P=0.03) but was greater in the DNase group (18 of 46 patients [39%]) than in the placebo group (odds ratio, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.30 to 9.75; P=0.01). Combined t-PA-DNase therapy was associated with a reduction in the hospital stay, as compared with placebo (difference, -6.7 days; 95% CI, -12.0 to -1.9; P=0.006); the hospital stay with either agent alone was not significantly different from that with placebo. The frequency of adverse events did not differ significantly among the groups., Conclusions: Intrapleural t-PA-DNase therapy improved fluid drainage in patients with pleural infection and reduced the frequency of surgical referral and the duration of the hospital stay. Treatment with DNase alone or t-PA alone was ineffective. (Funded by an unrestricted educational grant to the University of Oxford from Roche UK and by others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN57454527.).

Background: The optimal choice of chest tube size for the treatment of pleural infection is unknown, with only small cohort studies reported describing the efficacy and adverse events of different tube sizes., Methods: A total of 405 patients with pleural infection were prospectively enrolled into a multicenter study investigating the utility of fibrinolytic therapy. The combined frequency of death and surgery, and secondary outcomes (hospital stay, change in chest radiograph, and lung function at 3 months) were compared in patients receiving chest tubes of differing size (chi(2), t test, and logistic regression analyses as appropriate). Pain was studied in detail in 128 patients., Results: There was no significant difference in the frequency with which patients either died or required thoracic surgery in patients receiving chest tubes of varying sizes ( < 10F, number dying or needing surgery 21/58 [36%]; size 10-14F, 75/208 [36%]; size 15-20F, 28/70 [40%]; size > 20F, 30/69 [44%]; chi(2)trend, 1 degrees of freedom [df] = 1.21, P = .27), nor any difference in any secondary outcome. Pain scores were substantially higher in patients receiving (mainly blunt dissection inserted) larger tubes ( < 10F, median pain score 6 [range 4-7]; 10-14F, 5 [4-6]; 15-20F, 6 [5-7]; > 20F, 6 [6-8]; chi(2), 3 df = 10.80, P = .013, Kruskal-Wallis; chi(2)trend, 1 df = 6.3, P = .014)., Conclusions: Smaller, guide-wire-inserted chest tubes cause substantially less pain than blunt-dissection-inserted larger tubes, without any impairment in clinical outcome in the treatment of pleural infection. These results suggest that smaller size tubes may be the initial treatment of choice for pleural infection, and randomized studies are now required., Trial Registration: MIST1 trial ISRCTN number: 39138989.

Background: Bacterial infection of the pleural space often causes adherence of the pleural membranes by fibrous tissue, probably mediated by inflammation initiated by bacterial cell-wall motifs, including lipoteichoic acid-T (LTA-T). We postulated that therapeutically administered LTA-T might produce a similar effect, achieving control of malignant pleural effusion (pleurodesis)., Methods: Patients with histocytologically proven symptomatic malignant pleural effusions were included in this phase I toxicity and dose-escalation study, An indwelling pleural catheter was placed in the pleural effusion to drain the fluid fully. A control dose of intrapleural saline was administered after complete drainage (day 1) and pleural-fluid production was recorded for 7 days. On day 7 a single dose of intrapleural LTA-T (increasing in each patient) was administered and pleural-fluid production was monitored for a further 7 days. Long-term fluid control was recorded. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, ISRCTN44367564., Findings: Between November, 2004, and November, 2005, 14 patients were enrolled on the trial at the Oxford Centre for Respiratory Medicine (Oxford, UK). 13 of 14 patients received escalated doses of LTA-T. A dose-limiting toxic effect (ie, systemic inflammation) occurred at 3000 microg, and a therapeutic dose of 750-1500 microg was established. Toxic effects were mild and had no consistent pattern at the therapeutic dose. Pleural-fluid production decreased significantly after a dose of at least 750 microg LTA-T, compared with saline control (mean fluid production after saline control 1244 mL [SD 933], mean fluid production after LTA-T 394 mL [SD 375], mean difference -850 mL [SD 699], p=0.028), and six of seven (86%) patients achieved pleural-fluid control at 1 month with no further intervention., Interpretation: The toxic effects of intrapleural LTA-T seem to be mild and favourable when compared with the toxicity profiles of standard pleurodesis agents. There is early evidence of LTA-T-induced pleurodesis efficacy, suggesting that this might be a viable therapeutic strategy for the control of malignant pleural effusion.