The routine use of chest radiographs after chest tube removal in children who have had cardiac surgery

Utility of routine chest radiographs after chest drain removal in paediatric cardiac surgical patients-a retrospective analysis of 1076 patients

OBJECTIVES

Chest drains are routinely placed in children following cardiac surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of a clinically relevant pneumothorax and/or pleural effusion after drain removal and to ascertain if a chest radiograph can be safely avoided following chest drain removal.

METHODS

This single-centre retrospective cohort study included all patients under 18 years of age who underwent cardiac surgery between January 2015 and December 2019 with the insertion of mediastinal and/or pleural drains. Exclusion criteria were chest drain/s in situ ≥14 days and mortality prior to removal of chest drain/s. A drain removal episode was defined as the removal of ≥1 drains during the same episode of analgesia ± sedation. All chest drains were removed using a standard protocol. Chest radiographs following chest drain removal were reviewed by 2 investigators.

RESULTS

In all, 1076 patients were identified (median age: 292 days, median weight: 7.8 kg). There were 1587 drain removal episodes involving 2365 drains [mediastinal (n = 1347), right pleural (n = 598), left pleural (n = 420)]. Chest radiographs were performed after 1301 drain removal episodes [mediastinal (n = 1062); right pleural (n = 597); left pleural (n = 420)]. Chest radiographs were abnormal after 152 (12%) drain removal episodes [pneumothorax (n = 43), pleural effusion (n = 98), hydropneumothorax (n = 11)]. Symptoms/signs were present in 30 (2.3%) patients. Eleven (<1%) required medical management. One required reintubation and 2 required chest drain reinsertion.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of clinically significant pneumothorax/pleural effusion following chest drain removal after paediatric cardiac surgery is low (<1%). Most patients did not require reinsertion of a chest drain. It is reasonable not to perform routine chest radiographs following chest drain removal in most paediatric cardiac surgical patients.

Efficacy of chest X-rays after drain removal in adult and pediatric patients undergoing cardiac and thoracic surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Chest X-rays are routinely obtained after the removal of chest drains in patients undergoing cardiac and thoracic surgical procedures. However, a lack of guidelines and evidence could question the practice. Routine chest X-rays increase exposure to ionizing radiation, increase health-care costs, and lead to overutilisation of available resources. This review aims to explore the evidence in the literature regarding the routine use of chest X-rays following the removal of chest drains.

MATERIALS & METHOD

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Medline via Ovid, Cochrane central register of control trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials. gov without any limit on the publication year. The references of the included studies are manually screened to identify potentially eligible studies.

RESULTS

A total of 375 studies were retrieved through the search and 18 studies were included in the review. Incidence of pneumothorax remains less than 10% across adult cardiac, and pediatric cardiac and thoracic surgical populations. The incidence may be as high as 50% in adult thoracic surgical patients. However, the reintervention rate remains less than 2% across the populations. Development of respiratory and cardiovascular symptoms can adequately guide for a chest X-ray following the drain removal. As an alternative, bedside ultrasound can be used to detect pneumothorax in the thorax after the removal of a chest drain without the need for ionizing radiation.

CONCLUSION

A routine chest X-ray following chest drain removal in adult and pediatric patients undergoing cardiac and thoracic surgery is not necessary. It can be omitted without compromising patient safety. Obtaining a chest X-ray should be clinically guided. Alternatively, bedside ultrasound can be used for the same purpose without the need for radiation exposure.

Characterizing and quantifying low-value diagnostic imaging internationally: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources is a common problem, constituting 10-34% of health services spending in the western world. Even though diagnostic imaging is vital for identifying correct diagnoses and administrating the right treatment, low-value imaging-in which the diagnostic test confers little to no clinical benefit-is common and contributes to inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources. There is a lack of knowledge on the types and extent of low-value imaging. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to identify, characterize, and quantify the extent of low-value diagnostic imaging examinations for adults and children.

METHODS

A scoping review of the published literature was performed. Medline-Ovid, Embase-Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published from 2010 to September 2020. The search strategy was built from medical subject headings (Mesh) for Diagnostic imaging/Radiology OR Health service misuse/Medical overuse OR Procedures and Techniques Utilization/Facilities and Services Utilization. Articles in English, German, Dutch, Swedish, Danish, or Norwegian were included.

RESULTS

A total of 39,986 records were identified and, of these, 370 studies were included in the final synthesis. Eighty-four low-value imaging examinations were identified. Imaging of atraumatic pain, routine imaging in minor head injury, trauma, thrombosis, urolithiasis, after thoracic interventions, fracture follow-up and cancer staging/follow-up were the most frequently identified low-value imaging examinations. The proportion of low-value imaging varied between 2 and 100% inappropriate or unnecessary examinations.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive list of identified low-value radiological examinations for both adults and children are presented. Future research should focus on reasons for low-value imaging utilization and interventions to reduce the use of low-value imaging internationally.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42020208072.

Are Routine Chest Radiographs After Chest Tube Removal in Thoracic Surgery Patients Necessary?

INTRODUCTION

The routine use of chest x-ray (CXR) to evaluate the pleural space after chest tube removal is a common practice driven primarily by surgeon preference and institutional protocol. The results of these postpull CXRs frequently lead to additional interventions that serve only to increase health care costs and resource utilization. We investigated the utility of these postpull CXRs in thoracic surgery patients and assessed their effectiveness in predicting the need for tube replacement.

METHODS

Single-institution retrospective study comprising thoracic surgery patients requiring postoperative chest tube drainage over a 3-y period. Demographics and surgical characteristics, including surgical approach, procedure, and procedure type, were recorded. Outcomes included postpull CXR findings, interventions resulting from radiographic abnormalities, and the additional health resource utilization incurred by obtaining these studies on asymptomatic patients.

RESULTS

The study included 433 patients. Postpull CXRs were performed in 87.1% of patients, with 33.2% demonstrating an abnormality compared with the prior study. Among these, 65.7% resulted only in repeat imaging and 25.7% resulted in discharge delay. Overall, a total of 13 patients (3%) required chest tube replacement, three during the index hospitalization and the other 10 requiring readmission. Among those requiring chest tube replacement, 75% had normal postpull imaging, and all were symptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent pneumothorax after chest tube removal requiring immediate tube reinsertion is relatively rare and does not occur in the absence of symptoms. Our study suggests that routine postpull CXRs have limited clinical utility and can be safely omitted in asymptomatic patients with appropriate clinical observation.

Routine chest X-rays after pigtail chest tube removal rarely change management in children

BACKGROUND

The need for chest X-rays (CXR) following large-bore chest tube removal has been questioned; however, the utility of CXRs following removal of small-bore pigtail chest tubes is unknown. We hypothesized that CXRs obtained following removal of pigtail chest tubes would not change management.

METHODS

Patients < 18 years old with pigtail chest tubes placed 2014-2019 at a tertiary children's hospital were reviewed. Exclusion criteria were age < 1 month, death or transfer with a chest tube in place, or pigtail chest tube replacement by large-bore chest tube. The primary outcome was chest tube reinsertion.

RESULTS

111 patients underwent 123 pigtail chest tube insertions; 12 patients had bilateral chest tubes. The median age was 5.8 years old. Indications were pneumothorax (n = 53), pleural effusion (n = 54), chylothorax (n = 6), empyema (n = 5), and hemothorax (n = 3). Post-pull CXRs were obtained in 121/123 cases (98.4%). The two children without post-pull CXRs did not require chest tube reinsertion. Two patients required chest tube reinsertion (1.6%), both for re-accumulation of their chylothorax.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-pull chest X-rays are done nearly universally following pigtail chest tube removal but rarely change management. Providers should obtain post-pull imaging based on symptoms and underlying diagnosis, with higher suspicion for recurrence in children with chylothorax.

Thoracostomy Tube Removal in Pediatric Trauma: Film or No Film?

BACKGROUND

Use of routine chest x-rays (CXR) following thoracostomy tube (TT) removal is highly variable and its utility is debated. We hypothesize that routine post-pull chest x-ray (PP-CXR) findings following TT removal in pediatric trauma would not guide the decision for TT reinsertion.

METHODS

Patients ≤ 18 y who were not mechanically ventilated and undergoing final TT removal for a traumatic hemothorax (HTX) and/or pneumothorax (PTX) at a level I pediatric trauma center from 2010 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The outcomes of interest were rate of PP-CXR and TT reinsertion rate following PP-CXR. Clinical predictors for worsened findings on PP-CXR were also assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were included. A CXR after TT removal was performed in 57 patients (97%), with 28% demonstrating worsened CXR findings compared to the prior film. Except for higher ISS (p = 0.033), there were no demographic or clinical predictors for worsened CXR findings. However, they were more likely to have additional films following the TT removal (p = 0.008) than those with stable or improved PP-CXR findings. One (1.8%) asymptomatic child with worsened PP-CXR findings had TT reinsertion based purely on their worsened PP-CXR findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of PP-CXR did not guide TT reinsertion after pediatric thoracic trauma. Treatment algorithms may aid to reduce variability and potentially unnecessary routine films.

Are routine chest X-rays following chest tube removal necessary in asymptomatic pediatric patients?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine if routine chest X-rays (CXRs) performed after chest tube (CT) removal in pediatric patients provide additional benefit for clinical management compared to observation of symptoms alone.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was conducted of inpatients, 18 years or younger, who had a CT managed by the pediatric surgery team between July 2017 and May 2019. The study compared two groups: (1) patients who received a post-pull CXR and (2) those who did not. The primary outcome of the study was the need for intervention after CT removal.

RESULTS

102 patients had 116 CTs and met inclusion criteria; 79 post-pull CXRs were performed; the remaining 37 CT pulls did not have a follow-up CXR. No patients required CT replacement or surgery in the absence of symptoms. Three patients exhibited clinical symptoms that would have prompted intervention regardless of post-pull CXR results. One patient had an intervention guided by post-pull CXR results alone. Meanwhile, another patient had delayed onset of symptoms and intervention. No patients required an intervention in the group that did not have a post-pull CXR.

CONCLUSION

Chest X-ray after CT removal had a very low yield for changing clinical management of asymptomatic patients. Clinical symptoms predict the need for an intervention.

Clinical descriptors of pneumothorax following chest tube removal in paediatric cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

There is limited data describing the characteristics of paediatric post-operative cardiac surgery patients who develop pneumothoraces after chest tube removal. Patient management after chest tube removal is not standardised across paediatric cardiac surgery programmes. The purposes of this study were to describe the frequency of pneumothorax after chest tube removal in paediatric post-operative cardiac surgical patients and to describe the patient and clinical characteristics of those patients who developed a clinically significant pneumothorax requiring intervention.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective descriptive study (1 January, 2010-31 December, 2018) was utilised to review 11,651 paediatric post-operative cardiac surgical patients from newborn to 18 years old.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were diagnosed with a pneumothorax by chest radiograph following chest tube removal (0.2%). Of these 25 patients, 15 (1.6%) had a clinically significant pneumothorax and 8 (53%) did not demonstrate a change in baseline clinical status or require an increase in supplemental oxygen, 14 (93%) required an intervention, 9 (60%) were <1 year of age, 4 (27%) had single-ventricle physiology, and 5 (33%) had other non-cardiac anomalies/genetic syndromes.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of patients, we confirmed the incidence of pneumothorax after chest tube removal is low in paediatric post-operative cardiac surgery patients. This population does not always exhibit changes in clinical status despite having clinically significant pneumothoraces. We suggest the development of criteria, based on clinical characteristics, for patients who are at increased risk of developing a pneumothorax and would require a routine chest radiograph following chest tube removal.

Thoracostomy Tube Removal: Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Procedural Pain Management Guideline

OBJECTIVE

Thoracostomy tubes are placed following cardiothoracic surgery for the repair or palliation of congenital heart defects. The aim of this project was to develop and implement a clinical practice guideline for the provision of optimal analgesia during removal of thoracostomy tubes in pediatric postoperative cardiothoracic surgery patients.

METHODS

Methods used include a nonexperimental design utilizing chart audits to determine baseline documentation as well as procedure note evaluation to determine both baseline documentation and compliance with the new guideline. A convenience sample of unit-based nurses completed a knowledge test and a post-implementation survey.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in nursing knowledge related to the clinical practice guideline education and implementation. Documentation compliance was observed. Nursing satisfaction and feasibility of the new guideline was demonstrated.

DISCUSSION

This project was successful in increasing nursing knowledge of available resources for optimal procedural pain management in pediatric patients requiring thoracostomy tube removal on one in-patient acute care unit.

Just-in-time cost-effective off-the-shelf remote telementoring of paramedical personnel in bedside lung sonography-a technical case study

PURPOSE

Remote telementored ultrasound (RTMUS) is a new discipline that allows a remote expert to guide variably experienced clinical responders through focused ultrasound examinations. We used the examination of the pleural spaces after tube thoracostomy (TT) removal by a nurse with no prior ultrasound experience as an illustrative but highly accurate example of the technique using a simple cost-effective system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The image outputs of a handheld ultrasound machine and a head-mounted Web camera were input into a customized graphical user interface and streamed over a freely available voice over Internet protocol system that allowed two-way audio and visual communication between the novice examiner and the remote expert. The bedside nurse was then guided to examine the anterior chest of a patient who had recently had bilateral TTs removed. The team sought to determine the presence or absence of any recurrent pneumothoraces using the standard criteria for the ultrasound diagnosis of post-removal pneumothorax (PTXs). An upright chest radiograph (CXR) was obtained immediately after the RTMUS examination.

RESULTS

The RTMUS system enabled the novice user to learn how to hold the ultrasound probe, where to place it on the chest, and thereafter to diagnose a subtle unilateral PTX characterized as "tiny" on the subsequent formal CXR report.

CONCLUSIONS

As ultrasound has almost limitless clinical utility, using simple but advanced informatics and communication technologies has potential to improve worldwide healthcare delivery. RTMUS could be used both to enhance the information content as well as to digitally document important physiologic findings in any clinical encounter wherever a portable ultrasound and Internet connectivity are available.