|
|
||||||||
a Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
b Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
c Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
Received 31 May 2007; received in revised form 29 October 2007; accepted 2 November 2007.
* Corresponding author. Address: Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue/Desk F24, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA. Tel.: +1 216 444 1921; fax: +1 216 445 6876. (Email: ricet{at}ccf.org).
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Key Words: Lymphangiogram Contrast extravasation Thoracic duct embolization Thoracic duct disruption
| 1. Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 2. Patients and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
2.2 Lymphangiography
Isosulfan blue dye (1% Lymphazurin, US Surgical, Norwalk CT) was injected intradermally into the dorsal aspect of the web spaces between toes of both feet (Fig. 2A). After approximately 30 min, lymphatic channels on the dorsal surfaces of the feet were identified by green subcutaneous paths. The foot with larger caliber lymphatic channels was sterilely prepared, and a pedal lymphatic was isolated by superficial dissection and cannulated with a 30-gauge catheter (Cook, Inc., Bloomington, IN) (Fig. 2 middle, right). Ethiodized oil (Ethiodol, Savage Laboratories, Melville, NY) was infused into the lymphatic by a flow-limited pump (0.5 ml min–1; total volume 12 ml). Spot fluoroscopy was obtained periodically to confirm adequate antegrade progression of contrast. Following completion of ethiodized oil injection, normal saline was infused at the same rate. The cisterna chyli and thoracic duct were usually opacified within 1–2 h (Fig. 3
left). Large thoracic duct leaks were identified by frank extravasation of ethiodized oil into the mediastinum or pleural space (Fig. 3 middle). In patients without contrast extravasation, computed thoracic tomography (CT) enhanced identification of extravasation [1] (Fig. 3 right).
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3. Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Of the 36 patients in whom lymphangiography was able to be performed (97%), contrast extravasation was observed in 20 (56%), equivocal in one (2.8%), and not observed in 15 (42%). Of the 16 with no or equivocal contrast extravasation, 12 CT scans were performed. Of these, no extravasation was observed in 11, but extravasation was confirmed in the patient with an equivocal lymphangiogram. Therefore, contrast extravasation was observed in 21 patients (58%; Fig. 1).
Of the 21 lymphangiograms with contrast extravasation, triglycerides were positive in nine, negative in seven, and not done in five; chylomicrons were positive in 10, negative in seven, and not done in four. Either analysis was positive in 11 and neither done in three, a positive biochemical diagnosis in 61% of patients with contrast extravasation. In the 15 patients without contrast extravasation, triglycerides were positive in five, negative in three, and not done in seven; chylomicrons were positive in six, negative in three, and not done in six. Either analysis was positive in six and neither done in five, a positive biochemical diagnosis in 60% of patients without contrast extravasation.
3.2 Percutaneous treatment
Percutaneous treatment was performed in 21 of the 36 patients (58%; Fig. 1). One patient required two interventions. Thoracic duct embolization was achieved in 12 patients (gluing only in four, coils only in three, and both in five), and 10 thoracic duct disruptions were performed in nine (two in one patient) (Fig. 1). Disruption was performed when embolization was not possible because of inability to assess the cisterna chyli (n
= 2), pass the guide wire cranially (n
= 7), and advance the delivery device (n
= 1).
Percutaneous treatment was performed in four patients with negative lymphangiograms: embolization in one and disruption in three (Fig. 1). In two of these, it was believed that lymphangiography could be falsely negative because of prior lymphoma therapy or upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis. In two other patients with high pleural fluid output, respiratory failure or positive biochemical diagnosis led us to believe that lymphangiography could be falsely negative.
Four patients with contrast extravasation did not have percutaneous treatment (Fig. 1). In two the cisterna chyli could not be accessed, and in one each unfavorable body habitus and thymic extravasation prevented percutaneous treatment.
3.2.1 Safety of percutaneous treatment
There was no mortality. After lymphangiogram, one patient aspirated and required intubation, but recovered fully. After percutaneous treatment, one patient suffered a bile leak that was diagnosed and managed by endoscopic cholangiography and bile duct stenting.
3.2.2 Efficacy of percutaneous treatment
Surgical reoperation for chylothorax was performed in eight patients (Fig. 1). Right thoracotomy with thoracic duct ligation and decortication was performed in five (one of whom subsequently required a pleuro-peritoneal shunt), right thoracotomy and decortication in one, bilateral pleurex catheters in one, and oversewing of the thymus in one. Four of these reoperations occurred after disruption and four after no percutaneous treatment (two after lymphangiogram with contrast extravasation and two after lymphangiogram without contrast extravasation). No patient whose thoracic duct was percutaneously embolized required reoperation.
Median chest drainage for the 3 days before first attempted lymphangiogram (n = 37) was 530 ml day–1 (range 0–2700 ml day–1, 25% <310 ml day–1 and 25% >800 ml day–1). Median chest drainage for the 10 days after first lymphangiogram without percutaneous treatment (n = 15) was 35 ml day–1 (range 0–920 ml day–1, 25% = 0 ml day–1 and 25% >260 ml day–1), after first thoracic duct disruption (n = 9) was 175 ml day–1 (range 0–3200 ml day–1, 25% <26 ml day–1 and 25% >530 ml day–1) and after thoracic duct embolization (n = 12) was 100 ml day–1 (range 0 to 1120 ml day–1, 25% = 0 ml day–1 and 25% >210 ml day–1).
Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) was instituted in 32 patients (86%) prior to lymphangiogram. Median duration of TPN after first lymphangiogram without percutaneous treatment (n = 15) was 2 days (range 1–19 days), after first thoracic duct disruption (n = 9) 7 days (range 4–40 days), and after thoracic duct embolization (n = 12) 5 days (range 2–26 days).
First percutaneous treatment (n
= 21) occurred a median of 10 days after the index thoracic operation (range 6–33 days, 25%
8 days and 25%
22 days). Patients were discharged a median of 7 days (range 4–58 days, 25% <5 days and 25% >10 days) after first lymphangiogram without percutaneous intervention (n
= 15), 10 days (range 2–48 days, 25% <8 days and 25% >19 days) after the first percutaneous treatment (n
= 21), 8 days (range 2–19 days) after thoracic duct embolization (n
= 12) and 19 days (range 6–48 days) after first thoracic duct disruption (n
= 9).
| 4. Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The percutaneous treatment strategy has evolved, and the current technique is detailed under methods. Once the lymphangiogram has been performed, the treatment algorithm is as follows.
In all patients, slow return to oral intake and early avoidance of a fatty diet allowed time for collateral formation.
Percutaneous treatment may not immediately stop the flow of chyle; therefore, it rarely abruptly terminates chylous chest drainage. Time to develop collateral lymphatic circulation is variable and patient and procedure related. Management of clinically diagnosed chylothorax usually includes TPN, which confounds evaluation of efficacy of percutaneous treatment. Thoracic duct embolization reduces length of postoperative hospital stay to the range of those patients having lymphangiogram without percutaneous treatment (the majority of whom do not demonstrate thoracic duct leak). The value of thoracic duct disruption is questionable because of the subsequent need for reoperation in nearly half these patients.
A major limitation of this report is the evolutionary nature of this percutaneous diagnostic and treatment strategy. This report reflects our entire experience, including our earliest percutaneous attempts, lessons learned, and techniques refined.
Chylothorax continues to be a clinical challenge to diagnose and treat. Lymphangiography has a diagnostic role in chylothorax and is the platform for percutaneous intervention. Thoracic duct embolization is feasible, safe, and minimizes need for reoperation.
| Appendix A |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Dr W.H. Warren (Chicago, IL): It is a very interesting paper. Have you had any instance of embolization to the lung and respiratory compromise?
Dr Boffa: No, we limit the amount of the ethiodized oil that we inject into the lymphatic system. There have been some concerns that injecting more than 20 cc can be complicated by embolization of material into the lungs, but we have not experienced that.
Dr S. Jordan (London, UK): Thank you very much, I enjoyed your talk very much. I think that this technique is very impressive. You showed a graph of the day-by-day coil leak before and after the intervention. I think quantity of the day-by-day coil leak was actually reducing before the intervention. How long did you persist with conservative management before deciding that you needed to intervene in these patients?
Dr Boffa: Once a chylothorax is suspected, patients actually begin a conservative intervention in the form of bowel rest and nutritional support.
The lymphangiogram took place a median of 10 days after the index thoracic procedure. I think the observed decline in chest tube output reflects the bowel rest and the TPN support. I do think this graph can be confusing. The patients were very different in each arm of the procedure groups. For example, many of the patients in whom no intervention was performed did not have a leak identified by lymphangiogram. Therefore, the biology, anatomy, and process differed from those in patients in which a leak was demonstrated.
Dr Jordan: It is interesting to note that the patients without an intervention seem to do the best, statistically in your group. Can you explain that?
Dr Boffa: The majority of patients in whom nothing was done had a negative lymphangiogram. Within the spectrum of lymphatic leaks that can be considered chylothoraces, the patients you are referring to probably had a less severe leak (or else the lymphangiogram should have detected it).
That being said, it becomes unclear how to best determine the impact of a thoracic duct intervention (embolization or disruption). I think the most compelling evidence I can offer comes from our yet unpublished experience with chylothorax after esophagectomy. In that series of more than 40 patients, 50% underwent a reoperation to ligate the thoracic duct. In the present series, none of the embolized patients required a reoperation. This suggests that at least some of the embolized patients were saved from a second surgery by percutaneous procedure. Other parameters, such as chest tube drainage, duration of TPN, and length of stay, are too dependent on the degree of the initial lymphatic leak, and are difficult to interpret in such a heterogeneous group.
Dr H.B. Ris (Lausanne, Switzerland): Thank you for presenting this elegant technique which is obviously quite a delicate one. Can you tell us about its learning curve and in how many patients you were able to cannulate the thoracic duct via translumbar punction. I ask this question after disappointing results obtained by translumbar punction for chemical lumbar sympathectomy.
Dr Boffa: We discovered early on that embolization was the preferred procedure. Therefore, any patient who was disrupted represented an attempted embolization in which we either could not access the thoracic duct, or a wire could not be advanced to guide a catheter into the duct for embolization. There were nine disrupted patients plus the four other patients with positive lymphangiograms in whom nothing was done. We have not actually looked within this time period to track the prevalence of disruption over time, but my general sense is that we have done more embolizations in the later 2 years than in the first 2 years. We have two dedicated interventional radiologists, Dr Sands and Dr Geisinger, who have embraced this technology. Their original procedure time was more than 6 h, which as you might imagine the patients did not appreciate. Now it can be done in closer to 4 h. I would summarize by saying that in the 37 patients we presented here, execution of the procedure became faster and ability to perform the embolization more reliable.
Dr A. Toker (Istanbul, Turkey): I want to ask the cost of the procedure and the cost effect in coming days.
Dr Boffa: The most expensive part of this procedure is the monopolization of the interventional radiologists. When we first started this technique, we basically shut down the interventional radiology suite for the entire day. I do not know the exact cost of the materials (coils and glue) and the imaging (fluoroscopy plus CT scan); however, I think it would be at least comparable to a second operation but without subjecting patients to the morbidity of another procedure.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Presented at the 15th European Conference on General Thoracic Surgery, Leuven, Belgium, June 3–6, 2007.

This study was supported in part by the Daniel & Karen Lee Chair in Thoracic Surgery (TWR) and the Kenneth Gee and Paula Shaw, PhD, Chair in Heart Research (EHB).
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B. L. Pettiford, M. J. Schuchert, G. Jeyabalan, J. R. Landreneau, A. Kilic, J. P. Landreneau, O. Awais, M. S. Kent, P. F. Ferson, J. D. Luketich, et al. Technical Challenges and Utility of Anterior Exposure for Thoracic Spine Pathology Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2008; 86(6): 1762 - 1768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. I. Sersar Chylothorax revisited Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., June 1, 2008; 33(6): 1159 - 1159. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. W. Rice and E. H. Blackstone Reply to Sersar * Chylothorax revisited and reassessed Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., June 1, 2008; 33(6): 1159 - 1160. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |