Study Overview
This study compares two methods for diagnosing unknown causes of fluid in the lungs: medical thoracoscopy (MT) and closed pleural biopsy (CPB).
Background
Medical thoracoscopy is popular for diagnosing lung fluid issues, but it’s not commonly available in developing countries like India.
Aims
- 1. To compare the effectiveness of CPB and MT in diagnosing undiagnosed exudative pleural effusions.
- 2. To evaluate the complications of both procedures.
Methodology
This study involved 38 patients with unknown lung fluid diagnoses from January 2020 to September 2021. They were randomly divided into two groups:
- Group A: 19 patients underwent Medical Thoracoscopy.
- Group B: 19 patients underwent Closed Pleural Biopsy using a Cope’s needle.
Ultrasound was used to guide the procedure.
Results
- Both MT and CPB had a diagnostic success rate of 78.9%.
- CPB was significantly less painful than MT.
- Patients undergoing CPB had a shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001).
- CPB had a 5.3% mortality rate, while no deaths occurred in the MT group.
Conclusions
The study suggests that closed pleural biopsy is still a valuable tool for diagnosing lung fluid issues, especially in areas with high tuberculosis rates. It is also cost-effective for developing countries like India.
Clinical Trial Importance
Clinical trials are essential for developing safe and effective treatments. It’s vital to integrate their findings into everyday medical practice.
Practical Solutions
DocSym, our AI-driven platform, simplifies access to ICD-11 standards, clinical protocols, and research, helping clinicians make informed decisions.
Value of Streamlined Operations
Our mobile apps facilitate scheduling, treatment monitoring, and telemedicine, enhancing patient care management.
Enhancing Clinic Efficiency
AI technology can improve clinic workflows, boost patient outcomes, and reduce paper usage. Learn more at aidevmd.com.
