A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of pigtail catheter with chest tube for drainage of parapneumonic effusion in children. | LitMetric

Background: The use of thoracostomy tube for drainage of parapneumonic effusion is an important therapeutic measure. In this study, we compared the effectiveness and complications between chest tube and pigtail catheter thoracostomy for drainage of parapneumonic pleural effusion in children.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of children with parapneumonic effusion during the period of July 2001 through December 2003. Patients who received thoracostomy with either chest tube or pigtail catheter were enrolled into this study. Medical records, such as age, sex, clinical presentation, subsequent therapies, hospital stay, laboratory data, and complications, were collected and compared between these two methods of intervention.

Results: A total of 32 patients (17 boys and 15 girls; age range, 2-17 years; mean age, 14 years) were enrolled into the study. Twenty patients were treated with traditional chest tubes, whereas 12 patients were treated with pigtail catheters. In the chest tube group, drainage failure occurred in one patient and pneumothorax occurred in two patients. In the pigtail catheter group, drainage failure occurred in two patients, but no case was complicated with pneumothorax. There were no significant differences in either drainage days or hospitalization days between the chest tube group and pigtail catheter group (6.0 ± 2.6 vs. 5.9 ± 3.8, p=0.66; 12.5 ± 5.6 vs. 17.3 ± 8.5, p=0.13).

Conclusion: The effectiveness and complications of the pigtail catheter were comparable to those of the chest tubes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pedneo.2011.08.007DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

pigtail catheter
24
chest tube
20
drainage parapneumonic
12
parapneumonic effusion
12
tube drainage
8
effectiveness complications
8
tube pigtail
8
medical records
8
enrolled study
8
patients treated
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!