NCT06314620

Brief Summary

Pleural diseases are among the most common clinical problems encountered in healthcare settings in Malaysia and even worldwide. Most patients presented in a hospital setting with pleural diseases will need pleural aspirations or thoracentesis and chest drains for a variety of reasons. Healthcare providers will often be exposed to patients requiring pleural drainage hence it is important to be aware of safe techniques and procedures of insertion and also maintaining the pleural drainage systems to yield beneficial results. Most often, smaller catheters were deemed to be less effective in view of slower drainage rates and associated with high risk of blockage. However presently , in tertiary hospital settings small bore intercostal chest catheters (SBICC) have become an alternative to large bore intercostal catheters (LBICC). SBICC has been found to be equally effective, less painful and easily tolerated by patients. Hence, proper maintenance of SBICC should be undertaken to reduce rates of occlusion and to yield most benefits from the pleural aspirations procedures. British Thoracic Society in their latest guidelines recommends the use of small bore intercostal chest drain as the first choice in draining pleural effusions. The success of draining pleural effusions with a SBICC has shown variable rates of success among different studies conducted. Most common issues faced are drain blockage and drain dislodgement. There is limited data comparing the use of normal saline flushing versus fibrinolytic drug lock in maintaining patency of small bore intercostal chest drains in draining pleural effusions. This has lead us in conducting this research to compare the rates of partial or complete occlusions among normal saline flush with and without heparin saline lock in maintaining the patency of small bore intercostal chest catheter among patients with pleural diseases in Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz, UKM requiring chest drains insertion.

Trial Health

77
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
40

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
13mo left

Started Mar 2024

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
recruiting

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Progress67%
Mar 2024Jun 2027

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

February 18, 2024

Completed
26 days until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

March 15, 2024

Completed
3 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

March 18, 2024

Completed
3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

March 1, 2027

Expected
3 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 1, 2027

Last Updated

November 19, 2025

Status Verified

November 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

3 years

First QC Date

February 18, 2024

Last Update Submit

November 17, 2025

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • To compare the rate (in percentage) of occlusions of intercostal chest catheter in participants underwent normal saline flushing with and without heparin lock

    Participants who underwent intercostal chest catheter insertion who received normal saline flushing with and without heparin lock.

    From the time of randomization to the time of the end of study up to 30 days post insertion of chest drain

Secondary Outcomes (5)

  • To determine the onset of intercostal chest catheter occlusions (in hours)

    From the time of randomization to the time of the end of study up to 30 days post insertion of chest drain

  • To determine the change of hemoglobin (in g/dL) post ICC insertion

    From the time of randomization to the time of the end of study up to 30 days post insertion of chest drain

  • To determine the change of platelet (in 10 9/L) post ICC insertion

    From the time of randomization to the time of the end of study up to 30 days post insertion of chest drain

  • To determine the adverse effects of heparin saline lock

    From the time of randomization to the time of the end of study up to 30 days post insertion of chest drain

  • To assess the number of fenestrations occluded (in numbers from 0-5) with fibrin or blood clots

    From the time of randomization to the time of the end of study up to up to 30 days post insertion of chest drain

Study Arms (2)

Participants who underwent ICC with normal saline flushing and heparin lock

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Participants who underwent intercostal chest catheter with normal saline flushing with heparin lock. Instillation done with 20 mls of Normal Saline flush followed by heparin saline lock, every 6 hours by a three way stopcock.

Drug: Heparin saline lock

Participants who underwent ICC with normal saline flushing without heparin lock

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Participants who underwent intercostal chest catheter with normal saline flushing without heparin lock. Instillation done with 20 mls of Normal Saline flush , every 6 hours by a three way stopcock.

Other: Without heparin saline lock

Interventions

Participants with intercostal chest catheter who underwent normal saline flushing with heparin saline lock

Participants who underwent ICC with normal saline flushing and heparin lock

Participants with intercostal chest catheter who underwent normal saline flushing without heparin saline lock

Participants who underwent ICC with normal saline flushing without heparin lock

Eligibility Criteria

Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsChild (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • All patients admitted in medical wards for pleural effusion who had small bore intercostal catheters inserted.

You may not qualify if:

  • Patients with hydropneumothorax with small bore intercostal catheters
  • Patients with septated effusion planned for intrapleural fibrinolysis
  • Patients with severe coagulopathy
  • INR ≥ 1.5
  • PT \> 37s
  • aPTT \> 100s
  • Patients with thrombocytopenia of less than 50 x 109/L
  • Patients who has not consented to be involved in the study
  • Patients with indwelling pleural catheters
  • Unconscious patients will be excluded from this study
  • Patients with poor GCS score will be excluded from this study

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

National University of Malaysia

Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur, 53300, Malaysia

RECRUITING

Related Publications (11)

  • Horsley A, Jones L, White J, Henry M. Efficacy and complications of small-bore, wire-guided chest drains. Chest. 2006 Dec;130(6):1857-63. doi: 10.1378/chest.130.6.1857.

  • Maskell N; British Thoracic Society Pleural Disease Guideline Group. British Thoracic Society Pleural Disease Guidelines--2010 update. Thorax. 2010 Aug;65(8):667-9. doi: 10.1136/thx.2010.140236. No abstract available.

  • Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM, Lee MJ. Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008 Jan-Feb;31(1):135-41. doi: 10.1007/s00270-007-9197-0. Epub 2007 Oct 18.

  • Davies HE, Merchant S, McGown A. A study of the complications of small bore 'Seldinger' intercostal chest drains. Respirology. 2008 Jun;13(4):603-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2008.01296.x. Epub 2008 Apr 14.

  • Porcel JM, Azzopardi M, Koegelenberg CF, Maldonado F, Rahman NM, Lee YC. The diagnosis of pleural effusions. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2015;9(6):801-15. doi: 10.1586/17476348.2015.1098535. Epub 2015 Oct 8.

  • Parulekar W, Di Primio G, Matzinger F, Dennie C, Bociek G. Use of small-bore vs large-bore chest tubes for treatment of malignant pleural effusions. Chest. 2001 Jul;120(1):19-25. doi: 10.1378/chest.120.1.19.

  • Mehra S, Heraganahally S, Sajkov D, Morton S, Bowden J. The effectiveness of small-bore intercostal catheters versus large-bore chest tubes in the management of pleural disease with the systematic review of literature. Lung India. 2020 May-Jun;37(3):198-203. doi: 10.4103/lungindia.lungindia_229_19.

  • Collop NA, Kim S, Sahn SA. Analysis of tube thoracostomy performed by pulmonologists at a teaching hospital. Chest. 1997 Sep;112(3):709-13. doi: 10.1378/chest.112.3.709.

  • Hooper CE, Edey AJ, Wallis A, Clive AO, Morley A, White P, Medford AR, Harvey JE, Darby M, Zahan-Evans N, Maskell NA. Pleural irrigation trial (PIT): a randomised controlled trial of pleural irrigation with normal saline versus standard care in patients with pleural infection. Eur Respir J. 2015 Aug;46(2):456-63. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00147214. Epub 2015 May 28.

  • Goossens GA. Flushing and Locking of Venous Catheters: Available Evidence and Evidence Deficit. Nurs Res Pract. 2015;2015:985686. doi: 10.1155/2015/985686. Epub 2015 May 14.

  • Shaikh N. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2011 Jan;4(1):97-102. doi: 10.4103/0974-2700.76843.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Pleural Effusion

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Pleural DiseasesRespiratory Tract Diseases

Study Officials

  • Mohamed Faisal Abdul Hamid, MBBS (IIUM)

    National University of Malaysia

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Mohamed Faisal Abdul Hamid, MBBS (IIUM)

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
OTHER
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

February 18, 2024

First Posted

March 18, 2024

Study Start

March 15, 2024

Primary Completion (Estimated)

March 1, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

June 1, 2027

Last Updated

November 19, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-11

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations