ABSTRACT
Pleural infection is a common condition encountered by respiratory physicians and thoracic surgeons alike. The European Respiratory Society (ERS) and European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) established a multidisciplinary collaboration of clinicians with expertise in managing pleural infection with the aim of producing a comprehensive review of the scientific literature.Six areas of interest were identified including the epidemiology of pleural infection, the optimal antibiotic strategy, diagnostic parameters for chest tube drainage, the status of intrapleural therapies, the role of surgery and the current place of outcome prediction in management.The literature revealed that recently updated epidemiological data continue to show an overall upwards trend in incidence, but there is an urgent need for a more comprehensive characterisation of burden of pleural infection in specific populations such as immunocompromised hosts. There is a sparsity of regular analyses and documentation of microbiological patterns at a local level to inform geographical variation and ongoing research efforts are needed to improve antibiotic stewardship. The evidence remains in favour of a small-bore chest tube optimally placed under image guidance as an appropriate initial intervention for most cases of pleural infection. With a growing body of data suggesting delays to treatment are key contributors to poor outcomes, this suggests that earlier consideration of combination intrapleural enzyme therapy (IET) with concurrent surgical consultation should remain a priority. Since publication of the MIST-2 study, there has been considerable data supporting safety and efficacy of IET, but further studies are needed to optimise dosing using individualised biomarkers of treatment failure. Pending further prospective evaluation, the MIST-2 regimen remains the most evidence based. Several studies have externally validated the RAPID score, but it requires incorporating into prospective intervention studies prior to adopting into clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: There is widespread acknowledgement that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disrupted surgical services. The European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) sent out a survey to assess what impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the practice of thoracic oncology surgery. METHODS: All ESTS members were invited (13-20 April 2020) to complete an online questionnaire of 26 questions, designed by the ESTS learning affairs committee. RESULTS: The response rate was 23.0% and the completeness rate was 91.2%. The number of treated COVID-positive cases per hospital varied from fewer than 20 cases (30.6%) to more than 200 cases (22.7%) per hospital. Most hospitals (89.1%) postponed surgical procedures. All hospitals performed patient screening with a nasopharyngeal swab, but only 6.7% routinely tested health care workers. A total of 20% of respondents reported that multidisciplinary meetings were completely cancelled and 66%, that multidisciplinary decisions were not different from normal practice. Trends were recognized in prioritizing surgical patients based on age (younger than 70), type of surgery (lobectomy or less), size of tumour (T1-2) and lymph node involvement (N1). Sixty-three percent of respondents reported that surgeons were involved in daily care of COVID-19-positive patients. Fifty-three percent mentioned that full personal protective equipment was available to them when treating a COVID-19-positive patient. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has created issues for the safety of health care workers, and surgeons have been forced to change their routine practice. However, there was no consensus about surgical priorities in lung cancer patients, demonstrating the need for the production of specific guidelines.