Non-vascular interventional radiology techniques versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in stage II-III empyema:...

Empyema often requires surgery such as video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). Minimally invasive nonvascular interventional radiology (IR) techniques, including hydrodissection and guidewire dissection, may be alternatives. We compared outcomes of IR and VATS for stage II-III empyema.

We retrospectively analyzed 45 patients with stage II-III empyema treated at a single center between April 2021 and October 2024 (IR, n = 23; VATS, n = 22). Primary treatment success was resolution without conversion to surgical management; repeat IR procedures were considered part of the IR strategy. Groups were compared using appropriate statistical tests (p < 0.05).

The Primary treatment success was 87.0 % (20/23) in the IR group and 100 % (22/22) in the VATS group (p = 0.233). The overall clinical outcome, including cases that required subsequent surgery, was 95.6 % in the IR group and 100 % in the VATS group (p = 1). One patient in the IR group required three IR sessions, all performed through the same access site. While IR recipients were significantly older (median 78.0 versus [vs.] 71.5 years; p = 0.046) and had worse performance status (p = 0.015), there was no significant difference in hospital stay, drainage duration, or antibiotic therapy. Ninety-day mortality was 8.7 % (2/23) for IR and 0 % (0/22) for VATS (p = 0.49), with no procedure-related deaths.

In this cohort, no statistically significant difference in overall outcomes was observed between IR-based management and VATS for stage II-III empyema.