AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightDiscussion and Conclusion: In the evaluation of 54 case series of drainage using Pleuracan due to pleural effusions in one-year period, we obtained results consistent with the literature in terms of diagnosis, etiologic causes, treatment, and complications.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Özet
Introduction: This retrospective study aimed to investigate the clinical status of 54 patients with massive pleural effusion who had Pleuracan drainage in the emergency medicine department, and to evaluate the compliance with the literature. Methods: The medical records of 54 patients who underwent drainage using Pleuracan due to massive pleural effusion in the emergency department between January 1 and December 31, 2016 were obtained. They contained data concerning their demographic features, the cause of pleural effusion, the patient’s complaints, the characteristics of the pleural fluid, and complications during the procedure. Results: There were 54 patients who underwent drainage using Pleuracan in the emergency department in 2016. Of these patients, 51% were female, and 48% were male. The mean age was 70.62 (36–88 ) years, and 50% of the patients had history of pleural effusion. The most common causes of pleural effusion were cardiac failure (48%) and malignancy (37%). The main complaint was dyspnea (81%). Pneumothorax occurred in four patients (7%) after drainage using Pleuracan. No other complication was observed during the follow-up. The pleural fluid had exudative characteristics in 10 cases and transudative characteristic in 44 cases. Of the patients, 1 (1.8%) died during follow-up, while 3 (5.5%) were discharged, 5 (9.2%) were transferred to other hospitals, and 45 (83%) were hospitalized. Discussion and Conclusion: In the evaluation of 54 case series of drainage using Pleuracan due to pleural effusions in one-year period, we obtained results consistent with the literature in terms of diagnosis, etiologic causes, treatment, and complications.