[Treatment of loculated parapneumonic empyema. Video assisted thoracoscopy or fibrinolytics?]

Objective: There is no consensus regarding the ideal treatment of loculated parapneumonic empyema (PPE). The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of drainage plus urokinase (DF) with video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS).

Material and methods: Retrospective review. Patients admitted with a PPE between January 2001 and July 2008. Loculated empyema was diagnosed by chest ultrasound and patients were treated with DF or VATS depending on the attending surgeon. Compared variables were: post-operative stay, total hospital stay, days of tube thoracostomy, post-operative fever and treatment failure.

Results: One hundred and twenty one patients were admitted with the diagnosis of PPE. Seventeen patients were excluded from analysis because of simple parapneumonic effusions. Of the 104 patients included in the study, 47 were treated with urokinase and 57 with videothoracoscopy. No statistically significant differences (P>.05) were found between the median values in the DF and VATS groups for hospital stay (median 12 vs 12 days) or post-operative stay (median 9 vs 9 days). There were differences in duration of tube thoracostomy (median DF group 5 days, VATS, 4 days, P<.05) and in the post-operative fever (median 3 vs 2 days, p<0,05).Twenty two per cent of children needed a second procedure (14 patients of DF and 9 of VATS group, P=.09).

Conclusions: According to our experience, the results of DF and VATS for the treatment of loculated parapneumonic empyema are similar. Although there are no statistical differences, there seems to be a higher rate of failure, with the need of more procedures in the DF group. This difference does not affect the average total hospital stay.