title: In patients with extensive subcutaneous emphysema, which technique achieves maximal clinical resolution: infraclavicular incisions, subcutaneous drain insertion or suction on in situ chest drain?
abstract: A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: 'In patients with extensive subcutaneous emphysema, which technique achieves maximal clinical resolution: infraclavicular incisions, subcutaneous drain insertion or suction on in situ chest drain?'. Altogether more than 200 papers were found using the reported search, of which 14 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Subcutaneous emphysema is usually a benign, self-limiting condition only requiring conservative management. Interventions are useful in the context of severe patient discomfort, respiratory distress or persistent air leak. In the absence of any comparative study, it is not possible to choose definitively between infraclavicular incisions, drain insertion and increasing suction on an in situ drain as the best method for managing severe subcutaneous emphysema. All the three techniques described have been shown to provide effective relief. Increasing suction on a chest tube already in situ provided rapid relief in patients developing SE following pulmonary resection. A retrospective study showed resolution in 66%, increasing to 98% in those who underwent video-assisted thoracic surgery with identification and closure of the leak. Insertion of a drain into the subcutaneous tissue also provided rapid sustained relief. Several studies aided drainage by using regular compressive massage. Infraclavicular incisions were also shown to provide rapid relief, but were noted to be more invasive and carried the potential for cosmetic defect. No major complications were illustrated.
authors.affiliation: School of Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
authors.forename: Charles H N
authors.initials: CH
authors.lastname: Johnson
authors.affiliation: School of Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
authors.forename: Sommer A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Lang
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of South Manchester, Manchester, UK.
authors.forename: Haris
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Bilal
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of South Manchester, Manchester, UK rammohankandadai@hotmail.com.
authors.forename: Kandadai S
authors.initials: KS
authors.lastname: Rammohan
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D019985:Benchmarking; D015505:Chest Tubes; D002648:Child; D004322:Drainage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D013352:Subcutaneous Emphysema / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000628:therapy*; D013396:Suction; D020775:Thoracic Surgery, Video-Assisted / Q000009:adverse effects; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: Air leak; Drains; Lung resection; Subcutaneous emphysema; Suction; Surgical emphysema