Treatment of Complicated Pneumonia

Community‐acquired pneumonia, the most common serious bacterial infection in childhood, may be complicated by parapneumonic effusion (ie, complicated pneumonia).1 Children with complicated pneumonia require prolonged hospitalization and frequently undergo multiple pleural fluid drainage procedures.2 Additionally, the incidence of complicated pneumonia has increased,37 making the need to define appropriate therapy even more pressing. Defining appropriate therapy is challenging for the individual physician as a result of inconsistent and insufficient evidence, and wide variation in treatment practices.2, 8

Historically, thoracotomy was performed only if initial chest tube placement did not lead to clinical improvement.9, 10 Several authors, noting the rapid resolution of symptoms in children undergoing earlier thoracotomy, advocated for the use of thoracotomy as initial therapy rather than as a procedure of last resort.114 The advent of less invasive techniques such as video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has served as an additional impetus to consider surgical drainage as the initial treatment strategy.1518 Few well‐designed studies have examined the relative efficacy of these interventions.2, 1922 Published randomized trials were single center, enrolled few patients, and arrived at different conclusions.19, 21, 22 In addition, these trials did not examine other important outcomes such as requirement for additional pleural fluid drainage procedures and hospital readmission. Two large retrospective multicenter studies found modest reductions in length of stay (LOS) and substantial decreases in the requirement for additional pleural fluid drainage procedures in children undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement.2, 20 However, Shah et al2 included relatively few patients undergoing VATS. Li et al20 combined patients undergoing initial thoracentesis, initial chest tube placement, late pleural fluid drainage (by any method), and no pleural fluid drainage into a single non‐operative management category, precluding conclusions about the relative benefits of chest tube placement compared with VATS. Neither study2, 20 examined the role of chemical fibrinolysis, a therapy which has been associated with outcomes comparable to VATS in two small randomized trials.21, 22

The objectives of this multicenter study were to describe the variation in the initial management strategy along with associated outcomes of complicated pneumonia in childhood and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different pleural fluid drainage procedures.

Methods

Results

Initial Pleural Fluid Drainage Procedures

The primary procedures included chest tube without fibrinolysis (47.8%); chest tube with fibrinolysis (17.8%); thoracotomy (22.8%); and VATS (11.7%) (Table 1). The proportion of patients undergoing primary chest tube placement with fibrinolysis increased over time from 14.2% in 2004 to 30.0% in 2009 (P < 0.001; chi‐squared test for trend). The initial procedure varied by hospital with the greatest proportion of patients undergoing primary chest tube placement without fibrinolysis at 28 (70.0%) hospitals, chest tube placement with fibrinolysis at 5 (12.5%) hospitals, thoracotomy at 5 (12.5%) hospitals, and VATS at 2 (5.0%) hospitals (Figure 1). The median proportion of patients undergoing primary VATS across all hospitals was 11.5% (IQR: 3.9%‐26.5%) (Figure 1). The median time to first procedure was 1 day (IQR: 03 days).

Figure 1

Discussion

This multicenter study is the largest to evaluate the management of children hospitalized with complicated pneumonia. We found considerable variation in initial management and outcomes across hospitals. Differences in timing of the initial drainage procedure explained only a small amount of the variability in outcomes. Children undergoing initial VATS less commonly required additional drainage procedures while children undergoing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis less commonly required readmission. Differences in total and post‐procedure LOS were not statistically significant. Differences in cost, while statistically significant, were of marginal relevance.

Previous studies have also shown significant variation in treatment and outcomes of children with complicated pneumonia across hospitals.2, 8 Our study provides data from additional hospitals, includes a substantially larger number of patients undergoing initial VATS, distinguishes between fibrinolysis recipients and nonrecipients, and is the first to compare outcomes between four different initial drainage strategies. The creation of national consensus guidelines might reduce variability in initial management strategies, although the variability in outcomes across hospitals in the current study could not be explained simply by differences in the type or timing of the initial drainage procedure. Thus, future studies examining hospital‐level factors may play an important role in improving quality of care for children with complicated pneumonia.

Patients with initial thoracotomy or chest tube placement with or without fibrinolysis more commonly received additional drainage procedures than patients with initial VATS. This difference remained when patients with CCCs were excluded from the analysis and when the analysis was limited to patients undergoing pleural fluid drainage within 2 days of hospitalization. Several small, randomized trials demonstrated conflicting results when comparing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and VATS. St. Peter et al22 reported that 3 (17%) of 18 patients undergoing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and none of the 18 patients undergoing initial VATS received additional pleural drainage procedures. Sonnappa et al21 found no differences between the two groups. Kurt et al19 did not state the proportion of patients receiving additional procedures. However, the mean number of drainage procedures was 2.25 among the 8 patients undergoing initial chest tube placement while none of the 10 patients with VATS received additional drainage.19

Thoracotomy is often perceived as a definitive procedure for treatment of complicated pneumonia. However, several possibilities exist to explain why additional procedures were performed less frequently in patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial thoracotomy. The limited visual field in thoracotomy may lead to greater residual disease post‐operatively in those receiving thoracotomy compared with VATS.31 Additionally, thoracotomy substantially disrupts the integrity of the chest wall and is consequently associated with complications such as bleeding and air leak into the pleural cavity more often than VATS.31, 32 It is thus possible that some of the additional procedures in patients receiving initial thoracotomy were necessary for management of thoracotomy‐associated complications rather than for failure of the initial drainage procedure.

Similar to the randomized trials by Sonnappa et al21 and St. Peter et al,22 differences in the overall and post‐procedure LOS were not significant among patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis. However, chest tube placement without fibrinolysis did not result in significant differences in LOS compared with initial VATS. In the only pediatric randomized trial, the 29 intrapleural urokinase recipients had a 2 day shorter LOS compared with the 29 intrapleural saline recipients.33 Several small, randomized controlled trials of adults with complicated pneumonia reported improved pleural fluid drainage among intrapleural fibrinolysis recipients compared with non‐recipients.3436 However, a large multicenter randomized trial in adults found no differences in mortality, requirement for surgical drainage, or LOS between intrapleural streptokinase and placebo recipients.37 Subsequent meta‐analyses of randomized trials in adults also demonstrated no benefit to fibrinolysis.38, 39 In the context of the increasing use of intrapleural fibrinolysis in children with complicated pneumonia, our results highlight the need for a large, multicenter randomized controlled trial to determine whether chest tube with fibrinolysis is superior to chest tube alone.

Two small randomized trials21, 22 and a decision analysis40 identified chest tube with fibrinolysis as the most economical approach to children with complicated pneumonia. However, the costs did not differ significantly between patients undergoing initial VATS or initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis in our study. The least costly approach was initial chest tube placement without fibrinolysis. Unlike the randomized controlled trials, we considered costs associated with readmissions in determining the total costs. Shah et al41 found no difference in total charges for patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement; however, patients undergoing initial VATS were concentrated in a few centers, making it difficult to determine the relative importance of procedural and hospital factors.

This multicenter observational study has several limitations. First, discharge diagnosis coding may be unreliable for specific diseases. However, our rigorous definition of complicated pneumonia, supported by the high positive predictive value as verified by medical record review, minimizes the likelihood of misclassification.

Second, unmeasured confounding or residual confounding by indication for the method of pleural drainage may occur, potentially influencing our results in two disparate ways. If patients with more severe systemic illness were too unstable for operative interventions, then our results would be biased towards worse outcomes for children undergoing initial chest tube placement. We adjusted for several variables associated with a greater systemic severity of illness, including intensive care unit admission, making this possibility less likely. We also could not account for some factors associated with more severe local disease such as the size and character of the effusion. We suspect that patients with more extensive local disease (ie, loculated effusions) would have worse outcomes than other patients, regardless of initial procedure, and that these patients would also be more likely to undergo primary surgical drainage. Thus, this study may have underestimated the benefit of initial surgical drainage (eg, VATS) compared with nonsurgical drainage (ie, chest tube placement).

Third, misclassification of the method of initial pleural drainage may have occurred. Patients transferred from another institution following chest tube placement could either be classified as not receiving pleural drainage and thus excluded from the study or classified as having initial VATS or thoracotomy if the reason for transfer was chest tube treatment failure. Additionally, we could not distinguish routine use of fibrinolysis from fibrinolysis to maintain chest tube patency. Whether such misclassification would falsely minimize or maximize differences in outcomes between the various groups remains uncertain. Fourth, because this study only included tertiary care children's hospitals, these data are not generalizable to community settings. VATS requires specialized surgical training that may be unavailable in some areas. Finally, this study demonstrates the relative efficacy of various pleural fluid drainage procedures on short‐term clinical outcomes and resource utilization. However, long‐term functional outcomes should be measured in future prospective studies.

Conclusions

In conclusion, emphasis on evidence driven treatment to optimize care has led to an increasing examination of unwarranted practice variation.42 The lack of evidence for best practice makes it difficult to define unwarranted variation in the treatment of complicated pneumonia. Our study demonstrates the large variability in practice and raises additional questions regarding the optimal drainage strategies. Published randomized trials have focused on comparisons between chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and VATS. However, our data suggest that future randomized trials should include chest tube placement without fibrinolysis as a treatment strategy. In determining the current best treatment for patients with complicated pneumonia, a clinician must weigh the impact of needing an additional procedure in approximately one‐quarter of patients undergoing initial chest tube placement (with or without fibrinolysis) with the risks of general anesthesia and readmission in patients undergoing initial VATS.

Community‐acquired pneumonia, the most common serious bacterial infection in childhood, may be complicated by parapneumonic effusion (ie, complicated pneumonia).1 Children with complicated pneumonia require prolonged hospitalization and frequently undergo multiple pleural fluid drainage procedures.2 Additionally, the incidence of complicated pneumonia has increased,37 making the need to define appropriate therapy even more pressing. Defining appropriate therapy is challenging for the individual physician as a result of inconsistent and insufficient evidence, and wide variation in treatment practices.2, 8

Historically, thoracotomy was performed only if initial chest tube placement did not lead to clinical improvement.9, 10 Several authors, noting the rapid resolution of symptoms in children undergoing earlier thoracotomy, advocated for the use of thoracotomy as initial therapy rather than as a procedure of last resort.114 The advent of less invasive techniques such as video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has served as an additional impetus to consider surgical drainage as the initial treatment strategy.1518 Few well‐designed studies have examined the relative efficacy of these interventions.2, 1922 Published randomized trials were single center, enrolled few patients, and arrived at different conclusions.19, 21, 22 In addition, these trials did not examine other important outcomes such as requirement for additional pleural fluid drainage procedures and hospital readmission. Two large retrospective multicenter studies found modest reductions in length of stay (LOS) and substantial decreases in the requirement for additional pleural fluid drainage procedures in children undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement.2, 20 However, Shah et al2 included relatively few patients undergoing VATS. Li et al20 combined patients undergoing initial thoracentesis, initial chest tube placement, late pleural fluid drainage (by any method), and no pleural fluid drainage into a single non‐operative management category, precluding conclusions about the relative benefits of chest tube placement compared with VATS. Neither study2, 20 examined the role of chemical fibrinolysis, a therapy which has been associated with outcomes comparable to VATS in two small randomized trials.21, 22

The objectives of this multicenter study were to describe the variation in the initial management strategy along with associated outcomes of complicated pneumonia in childhood and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different pleural fluid drainage procedures.

Methods

Results

Initial Pleural Fluid Drainage Procedures

The primary procedures included chest tube without fibrinolysis (47.8%); chest tube with fibrinolysis (17.8%); thoracotomy (22.8%); and VATS (11.7%) (Table 1). The proportion of patients undergoing primary chest tube placement with fibrinolysis increased over time from 14.2% in 2004 to 30.0% in 2009 (P < 0.001; chi‐squared test for trend). The initial procedure varied by hospital with the greatest proportion of patients undergoing primary chest tube placement without fibrinolysis at 28 (70.0%) hospitals, chest tube placement with fibrinolysis at 5 (12.5%) hospitals, thoracotomy at 5 (12.5%) hospitals, and VATS at 2 (5.0%) hospitals (Figure 1). The median proportion of patients undergoing primary VATS across all hospitals was 11.5% (IQR: 3.9%‐26.5%) (Figure 1). The median time to first procedure was 1 day (IQR: 03 days).

Figure 1

Discussion

This multicenter study is the largest to evaluate the management of children hospitalized with complicated pneumonia. We found considerable variation in initial management and outcomes across hospitals. Differences in timing of the initial drainage procedure explained only a small amount of the variability in outcomes. Children undergoing initial VATS less commonly required additional drainage procedures while children undergoing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis less commonly required readmission. Differences in total and post‐procedure LOS were not statistically significant. Differences in cost, while statistically significant, were of marginal relevance.

Previous studies have also shown significant variation in treatment and outcomes of children with complicated pneumonia across hospitals.2, 8 Our study provides data from additional hospitals, includes a substantially larger number of patients undergoing initial VATS, distinguishes between fibrinolysis recipients and nonrecipients, and is the first to compare outcomes between four different initial drainage strategies. The creation of national consensus guidelines might reduce variability in initial management strategies, although the variability in outcomes across hospitals in the current study could not be explained simply by differences in the type or timing of the initial drainage procedure. Thus, future studies examining hospital‐level factors may play an important role in improving quality of care for children with complicated pneumonia.

Patients with initial thoracotomy or chest tube placement with or without fibrinolysis more commonly received additional drainage procedures than patients with initial VATS. This difference remained when patients with CCCs were excluded from the analysis and when the analysis was limited to patients undergoing pleural fluid drainage within 2 days of hospitalization. Several small, randomized trials demonstrated conflicting results when comparing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and VATS. St. Peter et al22 reported that 3 (17%) of 18 patients undergoing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and none of the 18 patients undergoing initial VATS received additional pleural drainage procedures. Sonnappa et al21 found no differences between the two groups. Kurt et al19 did not state the proportion of patients receiving additional procedures. However, the mean number of drainage procedures was 2.25 among the 8 patients undergoing initial chest tube placement while none of the 10 patients with VATS received additional drainage.19

Thoracotomy is often perceived as a definitive procedure for treatment of complicated pneumonia. However, several possibilities exist to explain why additional procedures were performed less frequently in patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial thoracotomy. The limited visual field in thoracotomy may lead to greater residual disease post‐operatively in those receiving thoracotomy compared with VATS.31 Additionally, thoracotomy substantially disrupts the integrity of the chest wall and is consequently associated with complications such as bleeding and air leak into the pleural cavity more often than VATS.31, 32 It is thus possible that some of the additional procedures in patients receiving initial thoracotomy were necessary for management of thoracotomy‐associated complications rather than for failure of the initial drainage procedure.

Similar to the randomized trials by Sonnappa et al21 and St. Peter et al,22 differences in the overall and post‐procedure LOS were not significant among patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis. However, chest tube placement without fibrinolysis did not result in significant differences in LOS compared with initial VATS. In the only pediatric randomized trial, the 29 intrapleural urokinase recipients had a 2 day shorter LOS compared with the 29 intrapleural saline recipients.33 Several small, randomized controlled trials of adults with complicated pneumonia reported improved pleural fluid drainage among intrapleural fibrinolysis recipients compared with non‐recipients.3436 However, a large multicenter randomized trial in adults found no differences in mortality, requirement for surgical drainage, or LOS between intrapleural streptokinase and placebo recipients.37 Subsequent meta‐analyses of randomized trials in adults also demonstrated no benefit to fibrinolysis.38, 39 In the context of the increasing use of intrapleural fibrinolysis in children with complicated pneumonia, our results highlight the need for a large, multicenter randomized controlled trial to determine whether chest tube with fibrinolysis is superior to chest tube alone.

Two small randomized trials21, 22 and a decision analysis40 identified chest tube with fibrinolysis as the most economical approach to children with complicated pneumonia. However, the costs did not differ significantly between patients undergoing initial VATS or initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis in our study. The least costly approach was initial chest tube placement without fibrinolysis. Unlike the randomized controlled trials, we considered costs associated with readmissions in determining the total costs. Shah et al41 found no difference in total charges for patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement; however, patients undergoing initial VATS were concentrated in a few centers, making it difficult to determine the relative importance of procedural and hospital factors.

This multicenter observational study has several limitations. First, discharge diagnosis coding may be unreliable for specific diseases. However, our rigorous definition of complicated pneumonia, supported by the high positive predictive value as verified by medical record review, minimizes the likelihood of misclassification.

Second, unmeasured confounding or residual confounding by indication for the method of pleural drainage may occur, potentially influencing our results in two disparate ways. If patients with more severe systemic illness were too unstable for operative interventions, then our results would be biased towards worse outcomes for children undergoing initial chest tube placement. We adjusted for several variables associated with a greater systemic severity of illness, including intensive care unit admission, making this possibility less likely. We also could not account for some factors associated with more severe local disease such as the size and character of the effusion. We suspect that patients with more extensive local disease (ie, loculated effusions) would have worse outcomes than other patients, regardless of initial procedure, and that these patients would also be more likely to undergo primary surgical drainage. Thus, this study may have underestimated the benefit of initial surgical drainage (eg, VATS) compared with nonsurgical drainage (ie, chest tube placement).

Third, misclassification of the method of initial pleural drainage may have occurred. Patients transferred from another institution following chest tube placement could either be classified as not receiving pleural drainage and thus excluded from the study or classified as having initial VATS or thoracotomy if the reason for transfer was chest tube treatment failure. Additionally, we could not distinguish routine use of fibrinolysis from fibrinolysis to maintain chest tube patency. Whether such misclassification would falsely minimize or maximize differences in outcomes between the various groups remains uncertain. Fourth, because this study only included tertiary care children's hospitals, these data are not generalizable to community settings. VATS requires specialized surgical training that may be unavailable in some areas. Finally, this study demonstrates the relative efficacy of various pleural fluid drainage procedures on short‐term clinical outcomes and resource utilization. However, long‐term functional outcomes should be measured in future prospective studies.

Conclusions

In conclusion, emphasis on evidence driven treatment to optimize care has led to an increasing examination of unwarranted practice variation.42 The lack of evidence for best practice makes it difficult to define unwarranted variation in the treatment of complicated pneumonia. Our study demonstrates the large variability in practice and raises additional questions regarding the optimal drainage strategies. Published randomized trials have focused on comparisons between chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and VATS. However, our data suggest that future randomized trials should include chest tube placement without fibrinolysis as a treatment strategy. In determining the current best treatment for patients with complicated pneumonia, a clinician must weigh the impact of needing an additional procedure in approximately one‐quarter of patients undergoing initial chest tube placement (with or without fibrinolysis) with the risks of general anesthesia and readmission in patients undergoing initial VATS.

Community‐acquired pneumonia, the most common serious bacterial infection in childhood, may be complicated by parapneumonic effusion (ie, complicated pneumonia).1 Children with complicated pneumonia require prolonged hospitalization and frequently undergo multiple pleural fluid drainage procedures.2 Additionally, the incidence of complicated pneumonia has increased,37 making the need to define appropriate therapy even more pressing. Defining appropriate therapy is challenging for the individual physician as a result of inconsistent and insufficient evidence, and wide variation in treatment practices.2, 8

Historically, thoracotomy was performed only if initial chest tube placement did not lead to clinical improvement.9, 10 Several authors, noting the rapid resolution of symptoms in children undergoing earlier thoracotomy, advocated for the use of thoracotomy as initial therapy rather than as a procedure of last resort.114 The advent of less invasive techniques such as video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has served as an additional impetus to consider surgical drainage as the initial treatment strategy.1518 Few well‐designed studies have examined the relative efficacy of these interventions.2, 1922 Published randomized trials were single center, enrolled few patients, and arrived at different conclusions.19, 21, 22 In addition, these trials did not examine other important outcomes such as requirement for additional pleural fluid drainage procedures and hospital readmission. Two large retrospective multicenter studies found modest reductions in length of stay (LOS) and substantial decreases in the requirement for additional pleural fluid drainage procedures in children undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement.2, 20 However, Shah et al2 included relatively few patients undergoing VATS. Li et al20 combined patients undergoing initial thoracentesis, initial chest tube placement, late pleural fluid drainage (by any method), and no pleural fluid drainage into a single non‐operative management category, precluding conclusions about the relative benefits of chest tube placement compared with VATS. Neither study2, 20 examined the role of chemical fibrinolysis, a therapy which has been associated with outcomes comparable to VATS in two small randomized trials.21, 22

The objectives of this multicenter study were to describe the variation in the initial management strategy along with associated outcomes of complicated pneumonia in childhood and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different pleural fluid drainage procedures.

Methods

Results

Initial Pleural Fluid Drainage Procedures

The primary procedures included chest tube without fibrinolysis (47.8%); chest tube with fibrinolysis (17.8%); thoracotomy (22.8%); and VATS (11.7%) (Table 1). The proportion of patients undergoing primary chest tube placement with fibrinolysis increased over time from 14.2% in 2004 to 30.0% in 2009 (P < 0.001; chi‐squared test for trend). The initial procedure varied by hospital with the greatest proportion of patients undergoing primary chest tube placement without fibrinolysis at 28 (70.0%) hospitals, chest tube placement with fibrinolysis at 5 (12.5%) hospitals, thoracotomy at 5 (12.5%) hospitals, and VATS at 2 (5.0%) hospitals (Figure 1). The median proportion of patients undergoing primary VATS across all hospitals was 11.5% (IQR: 3.9%‐26.5%) (Figure 1). The median time to first procedure was 1 day (IQR: 03 days).

Figure 1

Discussion

This multicenter study is the largest to evaluate the management of children hospitalized with complicated pneumonia. We found considerable variation in initial management and outcomes across hospitals. Differences in timing of the initial drainage procedure explained only a small amount of the variability in outcomes. Children undergoing initial VATS less commonly required additional drainage procedures while children undergoing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis less commonly required readmission. Differences in total and post‐procedure LOS were not statistically significant. Differences in cost, while statistically significant, were of marginal relevance.

Previous studies have also shown significant variation in treatment and outcomes of children with complicated pneumonia across hospitals.2, 8 Our study provides data from additional hospitals, includes a substantially larger number of patients undergoing initial VATS, distinguishes between fibrinolysis recipients and nonrecipients, and is the first to compare outcomes between four different initial drainage strategies. The creation of national consensus guidelines might reduce variability in initial management strategies, although the variability in outcomes across hospitals in the current study could not be explained simply by differences in the type or timing of the initial drainage procedure. Thus, future studies examining hospital‐level factors may play an important role in improving quality of care for children with complicated pneumonia.

Patients with initial thoracotomy or chest tube placement with or without fibrinolysis more commonly received additional drainage procedures than patients with initial VATS. This difference remained when patients with CCCs were excluded from the analysis and when the analysis was limited to patients undergoing pleural fluid drainage within 2 days of hospitalization. Several small, randomized trials demonstrated conflicting results when comparing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and VATS. St. Peter et al22 reported that 3 (17%) of 18 patients undergoing initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and none of the 18 patients undergoing initial VATS received additional pleural drainage procedures. Sonnappa et al21 found no differences between the two groups. Kurt et al19 did not state the proportion of patients receiving additional procedures. However, the mean number of drainage procedures was 2.25 among the 8 patients undergoing initial chest tube placement while none of the 10 patients with VATS received additional drainage.19

Thoracotomy is often perceived as a definitive procedure for treatment of complicated pneumonia. However, several possibilities exist to explain why additional procedures were performed less frequently in patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial thoracotomy. The limited visual field in thoracotomy may lead to greater residual disease post‐operatively in those receiving thoracotomy compared with VATS.31 Additionally, thoracotomy substantially disrupts the integrity of the chest wall and is consequently associated with complications such as bleeding and air leak into the pleural cavity more often than VATS.31, 32 It is thus possible that some of the additional procedures in patients receiving initial thoracotomy were necessary for management of thoracotomy‐associated complications rather than for failure of the initial drainage procedure.

Similar to the randomized trials by Sonnappa et al21 and St. Peter et al,22 differences in the overall and post‐procedure LOS were not significant among patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis. However, chest tube placement without fibrinolysis did not result in significant differences in LOS compared with initial VATS. In the only pediatric randomized trial, the 29 intrapleural urokinase recipients had a 2 day shorter LOS compared with the 29 intrapleural saline recipients.33 Several small, randomized controlled trials of adults with complicated pneumonia reported improved pleural fluid drainage among intrapleural fibrinolysis recipients compared with non‐recipients.3436 However, a large multicenter randomized trial in adults found no differences in mortality, requirement for surgical drainage, or LOS between intrapleural streptokinase and placebo recipients.37 Subsequent meta‐analyses of randomized trials in adults also demonstrated no benefit to fibrinolysis.38, 39 In the context of the increasing use of intrapleural fibrinolysis in children with complicated pneumonia, our results highlight the need for a large, multicenter randomized controlled trial to determine whether chest tube with fibrinolysis is superior to chest tube alone.

Two small randomized trials21, 22 and a decision analysis40 identified chest tube with fibrinolysis as the most economical approach to children with complicated pneumonia. However, the costs did not differ significantly between patients undergoing initial VATS or initial chest tube placement with fibrinolysis in our study. The least costly approach was initial chest tube placement without fibrinolysis. Unlike the randomized controlled trials, we considered costs associated with readmissions in determining the total costs. Shah et al41 found no difference in total charges for patients undergoing initial VATS compared with initial chest tube placement; however, patients undergoing initial VATS were concentrated in a few centers, making it difficult to determine the relative importance of procedural and hospital factors.

This multicenter observational study has several limitations. First, discharge diagnosis coding may be unreliable for specific diseases. However, our rigorous definition of complicated pneumonia, supported by the high positive predictive value as verified by medical record review, minimizes the likelihood of misclassification.

Second, unmeasured confounding or residual confounding by indication for the method of pleural drainage may occur, potentially influencing our results in two disparate ways. If patients with more severe systemic illness were too unstable for operative interventions, then our results would be biased towards worse outcomes for children undergoing initial chest tube placement. We adjusted for several variables associated with a greater systemic severity of illness, including intensive care unit admission, making this possibility less likely. We also could not account for some factors associated with more severe local disease such as the size and character of the effusion. We suspect that patients with more extensive local disease (ie, loculated effusions) would have worse outcomes than other patients, regardless of initial procedure, and that these patients would also be more likely to undergo primary surgical drainage. Thus, this study may have underestimated the benefit of initial surgical drainage (eg, VATS) compared with nonsurgical drainage (ie, chest tube placement).

Third, misclassification of the method of initial pleural drainage may have occurred. Patients transferred from another institution following chest tube placement could either be classified as not receiving pleural drainage and thus excluded from the study or classified as having initial VATS or thoracotomy if the reason for transfer was chest tube treatment failure. Additionally, we could not distinguish routine use of fibrinolysis from fibrinolysis to maintain chest tube patency. Whether such misclassification would falsely minimize or maximize differences in outcomes between the various groups remains uncertain. Fourth, because this study only included tertiary care children's hospitals, these data are not generalizable to community settings. VATS requires specialized surgical training that may be unavailable in some areas. Finally, this study demonstrates the relative efficacy of various pleural fluid drainage procedures on short‐term clinical outcomes and resource utilization. However, long‐term functional outcomes should be measured in future prospective studies.

Conclusions

In conclusion, emphasis on evidence driven treatment to optimize care has led to an increasing examination of unwarranted practice variation.42 The lack of evidence for best practice makes it difficult to define unwarranted variation in the treatment of complicated pneumonia. Our study demonstrates the large variability in practice and raises additional questions regarding the optimal drainage strategies. Published randomized trials have focused on comparisons between chest tube placement with fibrinolysis and VATS. However, our data suggest that future randomized trials should include chest tube placement without fibrinolysis as a treatment strategy. In determining the current best treatment for patients with complicated pneumonia, a clinician must weigh the impact of needing an additional procedure in approximately one‐quarter of patients undergoing initial chest tube placement (with or without fibrinolysis) with the risks of general anesthesia and readmission in patients undergoing initial VATS.