Cargando…
Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial
INTRODUCTION: The management of recurrent malignant pleural effusions (MPE) can be challenging. Various options are available, with the most efficacious and widely used being talc pleurodesis. Talc can either be applied via a chest drain in the form of slurry, or at medical thoracoscopy using poudra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4248086/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25428632 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007045 |
_version_ | 1782346753896349696 |
---|---|
author | Bhatnagar, Rahul Laskawiec-Szkonter, Magda Piotrowska, Hania E G Kahan, Brennan C Hooper, Clare E Davies, Helen E Harvey, John E Miller, Robert F Rahman, Najib M Maskell, Nick A |
author_facet | Bhatnagar, Rahul Laskawiec-Szkonter, Magda Piotrowska, Hania E G Kahan, Brennan C Hooper, Clare E Davies, Helen E Harvey, John E Miller, Robert F Rahman, Najib M Maskell, Nick A |
author_sort | Bhatnagar, Rahul |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The management of recurrent malignant pleural effusions (MPE) can be challenging. Various options are available, with the most efficacious and widely used being talc pleurodesis. Talc can either be applied via a chest drain in the form of slurry, or at medical thoracoscopy using poudrage. Current evidence regarding which method is most effective is conflicting and often methodologically flawed. The TAPPS trial is a suitably powered, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial designed to compare the pleurodesis success rate of medical thoracoscopy and talc poudrage with chest drain insertion and talc slurry. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 330 patients with a confirmed MPE requiring intervention will be recruited from UK hospitals. Patients will be randomised (1:1) to undergo either small bore (<14 Fr) Seldinger chest drain insertion followed by instillation of sterile talc (4 g), or to undergo medical thoracoscopy and simultaneous poudrage (4 g). The allocated procedure will be performed as an inpatient within 3 days of randomisation taking place. Following discharge, patients will be followed up at regular intervals for 6 months. The primary outcome measure is pleurodesis failure rates at 3 months. Pleurodesis failure is defined as the need for further pleural intervention for fluid management on the side of the trial intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has received ethical approval from the National Research Ethics Service Committee North West—Preston (12/NW/0467). There is a trial steering committee which includes independent members and a patient and public representative. The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences, as well as being disseminated via local and national charities and patient groups. All participants who wish to know the study results will also be contacted directly on their publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN47845793. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4248086 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42480862014-12-02 Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial Bhatnagar, Rahul Laskawiec-Szkonter, Magda Piotrowska, Hania E G Kahan, Brennan C Hooper, Clare E Davies, Helen E Harvey, John E Miller, Robert F Rahman, Najib M Maskell, Nick A BMJ Open Respiratory Medicine INTRODUCTION: The management of recurrent malignant pleural effusions (MPE) can be challenging. Various options are available, with the most efficacious and widely used being talc pleurodesis. Talc can either be applied via a chest drain in the form of slurry, or at medical thoracoscopy using poudrage. Current evidence regarding which method is most effective is conflicting and often methodologically flawed. The TAPPS trial is a suitably powered, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial designed to compare the pleurodesis success rate of medical thoracoscopy and talc poudrage with chest drain insertion and talc slurry. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 330 patients with a confirmed MPE requiring intervention will be recruited from UK hospitals. Patients will be randomised (1:1) to undergo either small bore (<14 Fr) Seldinger chest drain insertion followed by instillation of sterile talc (4 g), or to undergo medical thoracoscopy and simultaneous poudrage (4 g). The allocated procedure will be performed as an inpatient within 3 days of randomisation taking place. Following discharge, patients will be followed up at regular intervals for 6 months. The primary outcome measure is pleurodesis failure rates at 3 months. Pleurodesis failure is defined as the need for further pleural intervention for fluid management on the side of the trial intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has received ethical approval from the National Research Ethics Service Committee North West—Preston (12/NW/0467). There is a trial steering committee which includes independent members and a patient and public representative. The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences, as well as being disseminated via local and national charities and patient groups. All participants who wish to know the study results will also be contacted directly on their publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN47845793. BMJ Publishing Group 2014-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4248086/ /pubmed/25428632 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007045 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Respiratory Medicine Bhatnagar, Rahul Laskawiec-Szkonter, Magda Piotrowska, Hania E G Kahan, Brennan C Hooper, Clare E Davies, Helen E Harvey, John E Miller, Robert F Rahman, Najib M Maskell, Nick A Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
title | Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (TAPPS trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | evaluating the efficacy of thoracoscopy and talc poudrage versus pleurodesis using talc slurry (tapps trial): protocol of an open-label randomised controlled trial |
topic | Respiratory Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4248086/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25428632 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007045 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bhatnagarrahul evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT laskawiecszkontermagda evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT piotrowskahaniaeg evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT kahanbrennanc evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT hooperclaree evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT davieshelene evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT harveyjohne evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT millerrobertf evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT rahmannajibm evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial AT maskellnicka evaluatingtheefficacyofthoracoscopyandtalcpoudrageversuspleurodesisusingtalcslurrytappstrialprotocolofanopenlabelrandomisedcontrolledtrial |