Establishing Equipoise: National Survey of the Treatment of Pediatric Para-Pneumonic Effusion and Empyema

Background: Despite six randomized trials of various treatments for pediatric para-pneumonic effusion (PPE), management approaches differ. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into opinions on PPE treatment with the goal of designing a definitive trial to generate consensus intervention guidelines. Methods: To evaluate physician opinions regarding PPE management, we developed a survey based on input from a nationwide, multi-disciplinary advisory group that established content validity. The survey was disseminated broadly to six pediatric medicine and interventional radiology groups. Descriptive and χ 2 statistics were calculated. Results: There were 741 respondents (response rate 13.1%), of whom 52.2% were surgeons, 15.2% hospitalists, 14.2% pulmonologists, 12.4% intensivists, and 6.0% interventional radiologists. Nearly all respondents (97.3%) reported caring primarily for pediatric patients. Eighty percent reported no written institutional treatment guidelines. Nearly all (90.3%) agreed that patients require antibiotics, but there was disagreement regarding their duration. Respondents also were split as to how often PPE required drainage. There were multiple absolute indications for drainage, including mediastinal shift on chest radiograph (67.2%) and loculations on imaging (47.7%). There were substantial differences in the preferred first-line methods of drainage based on the treating physician's specialty, with surgeons preferring tube thoracostomy and a fibrinolytic agent (42.0%) or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (41.6%), whereas interventional radiologists preferred either a tube thoracostomy (46.4%) or a tube thoracostomy with a fibrinolytic agent (39.3%) (p