| Literature DB >> 35328278 |
Marco Sperandeo1, Carla Maria Irene Quarato2, Rosario Squatrito3, Paolo Fuso2, Lucia Dimitri4, Anna Simeone5, Stefano Notarangelo6, Donato Lacedonia2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to specifically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of real-time ultrasound-guided thoracentesis in a case series of pleural effusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational prospective study was conducted. From February 2018 to December 2019, a total of 361 consecutive real-time transthoracic ultrasound (TUS)-guided thoracentesis were performed in the Unit of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound of the Research Hospital "Fondazione Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza" of San Giovanni Rotondo, Foggia, Italy. The primary indication for thoracentesis was therapeutic in all the cases (i.e., evacuation of persistent small/moderate pleural effusions to avoid super-infection; drainage of symptomatic moderate/massive effusions). For completeness, further diagnostic investigations (including chemical, microbiological, and cytological analysis) were conducted. All the procedures were performed by two internists with more than 30 years of experience in interventional ultrasound using a multifrequency convex probe (3-8 MHz). For pleural effusions with a depth of 2-3 cm measured at the level of the costo-phrenic sinus was employed a dedicated holed convex-array probe (5 MHz).Entities:
Keywords: effectiveness; pleural effusion; safety; transthoracic ultrasound; transthoracic ultrasound-guided thoracentesis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35328278 PMCID: PMC8946970 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12030725
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) ISSN: 2075-4418
Figure 1(A) Dedicated convex-array probe (5 MHz) equipped with a holed guide for needle insertion during interventional procedures. (B) Ultrasound-guided thoracentesis performed by the employment of a dedicated holed convex-array with the patient in a sitting position.
Figure 2(A) TUS scan showing an anechoic effusion with consensual parenchymal atelectasis during thoracentesis with a multifrequency convex probe (3.5 MHz). The tip of the needle is highlighted by a white arrow. (B) The corresponding CT scan shows a smooth thickening of the peribronchovascular interstitium and a bilateral pleural effusion with passive atelectasis of lower lobe in the right lung (black arrow).
Figure 3A complex nonseptated pleural exudate in a patient with pneumonia, measured by two orthogonal views (longitudinal and transversal), viewed by longitudinal scan using a convex multifrequency probe (3.5 MHz).
Figure 4(A) TUS scan showing a homogeneous iperechoic pleural exudates viewed by a convex multifrequency probe (3.5 MHz). The drained fluid was macroscopically hemorrhagic. (B) The corresponding CT scan shows a large right effusion in a patient with a diagnosis of metastatic kidney cancer.
Figure 5(A) TUS scan showing a complex nonseptated effusion with consensual parenchymal atelectasis. The tip of the needle during TUS-guided thoracentesis with a multifrequency convex probe (3.5 MHz) is highlighted by a white arrow. (B) The corresponding CT scan shows an extensive apico-parieto-basal pleural effusion of greater right expression (black arrow) with consensual lower lobe atelectasis. A bilateral thickening of interlobular septa and some right ground-glass opacities with partial sparing of the lung periphery are also present (congestive heart failure).
Macroscopic, microscopic, and TUS description of the pleural fluid according to the diagnosed clinical condition.
| Heart Failure | Pneumonia | Primary Lung Cancer | Lung Metastasis | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hemorrhagic | 0 (0.00%) | 12 (10.53%) | 34 (16.83%) | 8 (66.67%) | 54 (14.96%) |
| Citrine | 33 (100.00%) | 96 (84.21%) | 164 (81.19%) | 4 (33.33%) | 297 (82.27%) |
| Torbid | 0 (0.00%) | 6 (5.26%) | 4 (1.98%) | 0 (0.0%) | 10 (2.77%) |
| Transudate | 27 (81.82%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 27 (7.48%) |
| Exudate | 6 (18.18%) | 114 (100.0%) | 202 (100.0%) | 12 (100.0%) | 334 (92.52%) |
| Anechoic | 27 (81.18%) | 46 (40.35%) | 89 (44.06%) | 3 (25.00%) | 165 (45.71%) |
| Complex nonseptated | 6 (18.18%) | 58 (50.88%) | 103 (50.99%) | 7 (58.33%) | 174 (48.20%) |
| Hyperechoic | 0 (0.00%) | 10 (8.77%) | 10 (4.95%) | 2 (16.67%) | 22 (6.09%) |
Figure 6Gain variation on the same TUS scan. (A) Anechoic pleural effusion with correct gain setting. (B) Falsely hyperechoic pleural effusion due to improper gain increase.
Figure 7Stages of TUS-assisted thoracentesis. (A) Initial pleural effusion’s measurement using a convex 3.5 MHz holed probe. (B–D) Progressive lung re-expansion during drainage. The position of the needle tip (white arrows) is highlighted during all phases of the procedure until the needle is retracted.