Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis

Equipoise exists regarding the optimal method to drain pleural fluid during thoracentesis. While several institutions use wall-based automated suction, others point to the risk of excessively high suction pressures and therefore elevated barotrauma risk as a reason to avoid it. We first performed i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Abdias Rodriguez, Anuradha Ramaswamy, Aravind A. Menon, Noah Belkhayat, Victoria E. Forth, Scott L. Schissel, Majid Shafiq
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PAGEPress Publications 2025-07-01
Series:Monaldi Archives for Chest Disease
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.monaldi-archives.org/macd/article/view/3484
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850037676407783424
author Abdias Rodriguez
Anuradha Ramaswamy
Aravind A. Menon
Noah Belkhayat
Victoria E. Forth
Scott L. Schissel
Majid Shafiq
author_facet Abdias Rodriguez
Anuradha Ramaswamy
Aravind A. Menon
Noah Belkhayat
Victoria E. Forth
Scott L. Schissel
Majid Shafiq
author_sort Abdias Rodriguez
collection DOAJ
description Equipoise exists regarding the optimal method to drain pleural fluid during thoracentesis. While several institutions use wall-based automated suction, others point to the risk of excessively high suction pressures and therefore elevated barotrauma risk as a reason to avoid it. We first performed in vitro experiments involving drainage of a 1-liter saline bag using standard thoracentesis apparatus, a digital manometer, and either manual drainage (using a 60 mL syringe) or automated drainage (using wall suction at the maximum setting). The proceduralist was blinded to measurements during manual aspiration. Separately, in a clinical setting involving consecutive hospitalized adults undergoing thoracentesis, dynamic suction pressures were similarly measured during automated drainage. Total aspirated volume, time-to-evacuation, patient discomfort, and complications were also recorded. In vitro experiments showed that compared to manual aspiration, automated drainage using wall suction resulted in shorter average time-to-evacuation (230 sec vs. 365 sec), lower suction pressures (average maximum: -361±4.5 cmH2O vs. -496±5.1 cmH2O, p<0.0001), and less pressure variation (95% of values within a 20 cmH2O range vs. swings between 0 and -500 cmH2O). Twenty hospitalized adults undergoing thoracentesis via automated drainage (mean aspirated volume: 1649.5±685.5 mL) experienced similar suction pressures to those measured in in vitro experiments using automated drainage (average maximum: -350±59.2 cmH2O) and limited pressure variations (mean interquartile range: 19.3 cmH2O). There were no complications, including pneumothorax, hemothorax, or re-expansion pulmonary edema. Thoracentesis using automated wall suction does not generate excessively high suction pressures and reduces pressure swings. It appears safe and effective and may reduce the time-to-evacuation of a pleural effusion.
format Article
id doaj-art-b48e800dde9648389aa6af3826ea39ed
institution DOAJ
issn 1122-0643
2532-5264
language English
publishDate 2025-07-01
publisher PAGEPress Publications
record_format Article
series Monaldi Archives for Chest Disease
spelling doaj-art-b48e800dde9648389aa6af3826ea39ed2025-08-20T02:56:47ZengPAGEPress PublicationsMonaldi Archives for Chest Disease1122-06432532-52642025-07-0110.4081/monaldi.2025.3484Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysisAbdias Rodriguez0Anuradha Ramaswamy1Aravind A. Menon2Noah Belkhayat3Victoria E. Forth4Scott L. Schissel5Majid Shafiq6Harvard Medical School, Boston, MADivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MADivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MADivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MADivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MADivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MADivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA Equipoise exists regarding the optimal method to drain pleural fluid during thoracentesis. While several institutions use wall-based automated suction, others point to the risk of excessively high suction pressures and therefore elevated barotrauma risk as a reason to avoid it. We first performed in vitro experiments involving drainage of a 1-liter saline bag using standard thoracentesis apparatus, a digital manometer, and either manual drainage (using a 60 mL syringe) or automated drainage (using wall suction at the maximum setting). The proceduralist was blinded to measurements during manual aspiration. Separately, in a clinical setting involving consecutive hospitalized adults undergoing thoracentesis, dynamic suction pressures were similarly measured during automated drainage. Total aspirated volume, time-to-evacuation, patient discomfort, and complications were also recorded. In vitro experiments showed that compared to manual aspiration, automated drainage using wall suction resulted in shorter average time-to-evacuation (230 sec vs. 365 sec), lower suction pressures (average maximum: -361±4.5 cmH2O vs. -496±5.1 cmH2O, p<0.0001), and less pressure variation (95% of values within a 20 cmH2O range vs. swings between 0 and -500 cmH2O). Twenty hospitalized adults undergoing thoracentesis via automated drainage (mean aspirated volume: 1649.5±685.5 mL) experienced similar suction pressures to those measured in in vitro experiments using automated drainage (average maximum: -350±59.2 cmH2O) and limited pressure variations (mean interquartile range: 19.3 cmH2O). There were no complications, including pneumothorax, hemothorax, or re-expansion pulmonary edema. Thoracentesis using automated wall suction does not generate excessively high suction pressures and reduces pressure swings. It appears safe and effective and may reduce the time-to-evacuation of a pleural effusion. https://www.monaldi-archives.org/macd/article/view/3484Thoracentesispleural pressuremanual aspirationwall suction
spellingShingle Abdias Rodriguez
Anuradha Ramaswamy
Aravind A. Menon
Noah Belkhayat
Victoria E. Forth
Scott L. Schissel
Majid Shafiq
Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis
Monaldi Archives for Chest Disease
Thoracentesis
pleural pressure
manual aspiration
wall suction
title Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis
title_full Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis
title_fullStr Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis
title_full_unstemmed Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis
title_short Suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction-based automated drainage: an in vitro and in vivo analysis
title_sort suction pressures generated during thoracentesis using wall suction based automated drainage an in vitro and in vivo analysis
topic Thoracentesis
pleural pressure
manual aspiration
wall suction
url https://www.monaldi-archives.org/macd/article/view/3484
work_keys_str_mv AT abdiasrodriguez suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis
AT anuradharamaswamy suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis
AT aravindamenon suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis
AT noahbelkhayat suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis
AT victoriaeforth suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis
AT scottlschissel suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis
AT majidshafiq suctionpressuresgeneratedduringthoracentesisusingwallsuctionbasedautomateddrainageaninvitroandinvivoanalysis