Pleural Effusion
Conditions
Brief summary
Malignant pleural effusion remains a debilitating complication of end stage cancer, which can be greatly improved by the introduction of the indwelling tunneled pleural catheter (IPC). However, there is no standard of care regarding drainage and limited data on the utility of different drainage techniques. In addition, many patients develop discomfort and chest pain during drainage. The investigators propose to evaluate gravity drainage and suction drainage on quality of life measures and outcomes.
Detailed description
Indwelling tunneled pleural catheters (IPCs) are used to alleviate pleural effusion as a first-line therapeutic (albeit palliative) intervention. Limited data currently exists on drainage techniques and the impact the techniques may have on quality of life. Current recommendations for IPC drainage range from daily drainage to once a week drainage, as well as only when needed for dyspnea. It has been theorized that active drainage of effusions may have an impact on the development of chest discomfort/pain, whereas passive regimens may allow for more gradual intrathoracic pleural changes and potentially offer a difference in drainage discomfort. The objective of this investigation is to compare different drainage strategies of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) regarding patient quality of life and outcomes. Patients will undergo placement of a pleural catheter as per standard institutional protocol. Patients will be randomized on a 1:1 basis into the suction drainage (active) arm or the gravity drainage (passive) arm. Patients will receive follow-up at two weeks, four weeks, twelve weeks and then as needed post IPC placement per standard clinical protocol. All patients will be asked to fill out quality of life questionnaires and update drainage diary information with patient's providers. Patients will undergo standard care treatment throughout the disease course and no different interventions regarding the pleural disease will be performed as a result of enrollment within this study. Study interventions/procedures will consist of questionnaires and patient self-reported documentation regarding patient's care and outcomes.
Interventions
PROCEDUREVacuum-Based IPC
An indwelling pleural catheter is placed inside the chest cavity to drain fluid from around the lungs. One end remains inside the body while the other drains via suction.
PROCEDUREGravity-Based IPC
An indwelling pleural catheter is placed inside the chest cavity to drain fluid from around the lungs. One end remains inside the body while the other drains via gravity.
Sponsors
Johns Hopkins University
Rocket Medical plc
Swedish Medical Center
Medical University of South Carolina
University of Oxford
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Northwest Community Healthcare
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Clinical indications for placement of IPC for malignant pleural effusion a. Pleural effusion with symptomatic improvement in dyspnea after drainage of ipsilateral effusion * Clinically confident symptomatic malignant pleural effusion 1. Histocytological proof of pleural malignancy 2. Recurrent large pleural effusion in context of histologically proven cancer outside the pleural space * Plans for placement of IPC within ten days of enrollment * Age \> 17 years * Sufficient fluid on ultrasound to allow for safe insertion of IPC
Exclusion criteria
* Recent (less than 60 days) thoracic surgery or chest trauma causing chronic pain * Pregnant or lactating mothers * Previous ipsilateral chemical pleurodesis * Current contralateral indwelling pleural catheter * Known rib or thoracic skeletal metastasis causing pain * Concern for active pleural infection * Respiratory failure * Irreversible bleeding diathesis * Inability to provide care for indwelling tunneled pleural catheter * Significantly loculated pleural space precluding drainage of pleural space, for which IPC alone will likely not offer symptomatic benefit * Estimated life expectancy of \< 30 days (however, active enrollment in hospice program is not an
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in chest pain as assessed by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) | Daily, up to 2 weeks | The primary endpoint is the difference between the mean daily change in pain score during IPC drainage via the vacuum bottle technique and IPC drainage via the gravity bag technique over two weeks after IPC placement. Pre-drainage and post-drainage pain scores will be recorded each day of IPC placement. Measurements are in millimeters along a 10 cm VAS. VAS score is a range of 0 to 100. Lower limit is 0, meaning no pain; upper limit is 100, meaning extreme pain. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in mean difference in chest pain as assessed by VAS | pre-IPC placement, 12 weeks post IPC placement or time of pleurodesis | This secondary endpoint is the difference between the change in pain scores via vacuum bottle vs. gravity bag pre-IPC placement to the last available score after IPC placement. This last available score would be at 12 weeks or time of pleurodesis. Measurements are in millimeters along a 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). VAS score is a range of 0 to 100. Lower limit is 0, meaning no pain; upper limit is 100, meaning extreme pain. |
| Change in SF 36-Item Health Survey score | pre-IPC placement, 12 weeks post IPC placement or time of pleurodesis | This secondary endpoint is the difference between SF 36-Item Health Survey 1.0 scores via vacuum bottle vs. gravity bag from pre-IPC drainage to last available score after IPC placement (at 12 weeks or time of pleurodesis). Scoring is a 2-step process in which the numerical response from the Survey is first converted into a 0-100 scale (0 as lowest and 100 as highest possible score) using a conversion table by SF developers. These new values would be averaged according to their group identified in a second conversion table. |
| Change in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Dyspnea survey score | pre-IPC placement, 12 weeks post IPC placement or time of pleurodesis | This secondary endpoint is the difference between FACIT-Dyspnea scores via vacuum bottle vs. gravity bag from pre-IPC drainage to the last available score after IPC placement (at 12 weeks or time of pleurodesis). Individual responses are converted into scores, then summed for an overall score. Scores range from 0 (lower limit) to 30 (high limit); the higher the score, the worse the dyspnea. |
Countries
United Kingdom, United States
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORLonny Yarmus, DO
Johns Hopkins University
Outcome results
None listed