Abstract
BACKGROUND: Management of malignant pleural effusion typically involves insertion of an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) or chemical pleurodesis with agents such as talc.OBJECTIVES: To compare these management strategies with regard to success of pleural effusion management.METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was designed comparing patients with malignant and paramalignant pleural effusions and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status <4 managed with IPC insertion or talc pleurodesis (TP) through tube thoracostomy during non-contemporary three-year periods at a single centre.RESULTS: The IPC and TP groups comprised 193 and 167 patients, respectively. The pleural effusion control rate at six months was higher in the IPC group (52.7% versus 34.4% in the TP group; P<0.01), but the rate of freedom from catheter at 90 days and pleural effusion at 180 days was not significantly different (IPC 25.8% versus TP 34.4% [P=0.17]). Median effusion-free survival from the date of catheter insertion was significantly longer in the IPC group (101 days versus 58 days in the TP group; log-rank P=0.025). Both procedures were safe.DISCUSSION: While the results suggest better pleural effusion control and longer effusion-free survival with IPC insertion compared with TP, the present study had several limitations. Other recent studies have not shown one strategy to be clearly superior to the other.CONCLUSION: Both IPC insertion and TP remain acceptable options for the management of malignant pleural effusions.