Comparative Analysis of the Bonanno Catheter and Tube Thorocostomy in Effective Aspiration of Pleural Effusion

Authors

  • Govind K. Chetty
  • Narrinder R. Battula
  • Radhika Govindaswamy
  • Maqsood M. Elahi

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1532/HSF98.20061040

Abstract

Background and Methods. In our earlier report, we suggested the Bonanno catheter (a 14-gauge suprapubic catheter) as a less traumatic but equally effective alternative for drainage of a variety of fluid collections, including pleural effusion. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the Bonanno catheter compared with closed-tube thoracostomy in draining pleural effusion in 38 patients following routine cardiac surgery between 2003 and 2004. Twenty patients were managed using the Bonanno catheter and 18 were treated with standard tube thoracostomy. Data were collected retrospectively and statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS software. P < .05 was considered significant.

Results. There were 20 (53%) male and 18 (47%) female patients with a mean age of 63.5 years (range, 31-83 years). Significant differences were observed with regards to the amount of lignocaine administered locally, intra-procedure pain score, post-procedure pain score after 15 minutes, and amount of analgesia used on a regular basis (P < .05 in each case). Statistically, significant differences were also noted during 2 to 3 weeks follow-up between the 2 groups with regards to pain score. In the the tube thoracostomy group, 22.2% developed infection of the procedure site, requiring antibiotic treatment, whereas no infection was reported in the Bonanno group (P < .001).

Conclusion. This study provided evidence that smallbore drains such as the Bonanno catheter are safe and better tolerated than standard chest drains. This is consistent with the British Thoracic Society guidelines that strongly recommend small-bore drains for the drainage of pleural effusions as they are more comfortable than larger-bore tubes.

References

Barkan D, Nusair S, Resnick IB, et al. 2004. Tube thoracostomy during allogeneic stem cell transplantation does not carry an increased risk for infections or bleeding. Clin Transplant 18:85-8.nBonanno PJ, Landers DE, Rock DE. 1970. Bladder drainage with the suprapubic catheter needle. Obstet Gynecol 35:807-12.nGobien RP, Stanley JH, Schabel SI, et al. 1985. The effect of drainage tube size on adequacy of percutaneous abscess drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 8:100-2.nMitri RK, Brown SD, Zurakowski D, et al. 2002. Outcomes of primary image-guided drainage of parapneumonic effusions in children. Pediatrics 110:e37.nRothlin MA, Schob O, Klotz H, Candinas D, Largiader F. 1998. Percutaneous drainage of abdominal abscesses: are large-bore catheters necessary? Eur J Surg 164:419-24.nvan Sonnenberg E, Ferrucci JT, Mueller PR. 1984. Percutaneous drainage of 250 abdominal abscesses and fluid collections. Part I: results, failures and complications. Radiology 151:337-341.nvan Sonnenberg E, Ferrucci JT, Mueller PR. 1982. Percutaneous drainage of abscesses and fluid collections. Technique, results and applications. Radiology 142:1-10.nVan Tubergen A, Debats I, Ryser L, et al. 2002. Use of a numerical rating scale as an answer modality in ankylosing spondylitis-specific questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum 47:242-8.nChetty GK, Elahi MM, Siddagangaiah V, Leverment JN. 2005.nBonanno's catheter: a less invasive alternative for drainage of pleural effusion. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129:219-20.nMiller KS, Sahn SA. 1987. Chest tubes. Indications, technique, management and complications. Chest 91:258-64.nPark JK, Kraus FC, Haaga JR. 1993. Fluid flow during percutaneous drainage procedures: an in vitro study of the effects of fluid viscosity, catheter size, and adjunctive urokinase. Am J Roentgenol 160:165-9.n

Published

2006-06-20

How to Cite

Chetty, G. K., Battula, N. R., Govindaswamy, R., & Elahi, M. M. (2006). Comparative Analysis of the Bonanno Catheter and Tube Thorocostomy in Effective Aspiration of Pleural Effusion. The Heart Surgery Forum, 9(4), E731-E734. https://doi.org/10.1532/HSF98.20061040

Issue

Section

Article