Efficacy of Iodopovidone Pleurodesis and Comparison of Small-Bore Catheter Versus Large-Bore Chest Tube

Abstract

Background

To evaluate the efficacy of iodopovidone as an agent for pleurodesis in malignant pleural effusion (MPE) and to compare the efficacy of small-bore catheter (Pleuracan, Braun, Melsungen, Germany) and conventional large-bore chest tube in pleural fluid drainage and sclerotherapy.

Methods

Patients with MPE were prospectively consecutively randomized into two groups between August 2004 and February 2007: pleurodesis via conventional (32F) chest tube (group 1) and small-bore catheter (group 2), both using iodopovidone. After 3 months’ follow-up, response rates (complete or partial), complication rates, and duration of procedures within whole group, group 1, and group 2 were compared. Statistical analyses were performed by Mann-Whitney U, χ², and Fisher’s exact test.

Results

Forty-three pleurodeses were performed in 41 patients. The response was complete in 26 (60.5%) and partial in 12 (27.9%), and the overall success rate was 88.4%. The response rate was not associated with the type of inserted tube (P = .750), pleural fluid pH (P = .290), or pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase (P = .727). In group 1 (n = 20), 12 demonstrated complete and 6 demonstrated partial response, with a 90% success rate; success was 86.9% in group 2, with complete response in 14 and partial response in 6 patients. Success rates were similar in the two groups (P = 1.000). Of 43 procedures, complications were observed in 14 (32.5%), and complication rates were 35% and 30.4% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = .750). The most frequent complication was pain (16.2%), followed by fever, subcutaneous emphysema, dyspnea, and hypotension.

Conclusion

Iodopovidone is an effective, inexpensive, safe, and easily available alternative in chemical pleurodesis in MPE. The success rates of pleurodesis were found to be similar regardless of the type of the tube inserted.