A retrospective study on the safety of small and large volume paracentesis and risk factors for adverse events in patients with gastrointestinal cancer with malignant ascites.

4区 医学 Q2 Nursing
Yuri Tsujimoto, Toru Kadono, Shin Kameishi, Nanako Matsuo, Hiroyuki Kodama, Hiroki Yukami, Ken Asaishi, Toshifumi Yamaguchi, Hiroki Nishikawa
{"title":"A retrospective study on the safety of small and large volume paracentesis and risk factors for adverse events in patients with gastrointestinal cancer with malignant ascites.","authors":"Yuri Tsujimoto, Toru Kadono, Shin Kameishi, Nanako Matsuo, Hiroyuki Kodama, Hiroki Yukami, Ken Asaishi, Toshifumi Yamaguchi, Hiroki Nishikawa","doi":"10.21037/apm-2026-1-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal drainage volume for paracentesis in malignant ascites (MA) has not been established, and identifying risk factors for paracentesis may serve as a guideline for clinical decisions regarding drainage volume in MA patients. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the safety of small-volume drainage (SVD) versus large-volume drainage (LVD) in MA patients and to identify risk factors for adverse events (AEs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center retrospective study analyzed gastrointestinal cancer patients who underwent paracentesis between 2014 and 2023. Patients were categorized into SVD (<3,000 mL) and LVD (≥3,000 mL) groups. The primary endpoint was the incidence of paracentesis-related AEs, including hypotension, infection, renal dysfunction, and hyponatremia. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for AEs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 89 eligible patients, 58 received SVD and 31 received LVD. The incidence of AEs was significantly higher in the LVD group compared to the SVD group (41.9% vs. 20.7%, P=0.04), particularly for hypotension (12.9% vs. 1.7%, P=0.04). In multivariate analysis, serum albumin <2.5 g/dL [odds ratio (OR) 3.20; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-9.64] and LVD (OR 3.45; 95% CI: 1.20-9.93) were identified as independent risk factors for AEs. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS; P=0.86) or the interval to subsequent paracentesis (P=0.21) between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Large-volume paracentesis was associated with a higher risk of AEs without additional efficacy in terms of symptom control. SVD appears to be a safer and equally effective option, especially for patients with low serum albumin. These findings support a conservative and individualized approach to fluid removal in patients with MA.</p>","PeriodicalId":7956,"journal":{"name":"Annals of palliative medicine","volume":"15 3","pages":"34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of palliative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-2026-1-0002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The optimal drainage volume for paracentesis in malignant ascites (MA) has not been established, and identifying risk factors for paracentesis may serve as a guideline for clinical decisions regarding drainage volume in MA patients. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the safety of small-volume drainage (SVD) versus large-volume drainage (LVD) in MA patients and to identify risk factors for adverse events (AEs).

Methods: This single-center retrospective study analyzed gastrointestinal cancer patients who underwent paracentesis between 2014 and 2023. Patients were categorized into SVD (<3,000 mL) and LVD (≥3,000 mL) groups. The primary endpoint was the incidence of paracentesis-related AEs, including hypotension, infection, renal dysfunction, and hyponatremia. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for AEs.

Results: Among 89 eligible patients, 58 received SVD and 31 received LVD. The incidence of AEs was significantly higher in the LVD group compared to the SVD group (41.9% vs. 20.7%, P=0.04), particularly for hypotension (12.9% vs. 1.7%, P=0.04). In multivariate analysis, serum albumin <2.5 g/dL [odds ratio (OR) 3.20; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-9.64] and LVD (OR 3.45; 95% CI: 1.20-9.93) were identified as independent risk factors for AEs. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS; P=0.86) or the interval to subsequent paracentesis (P=0.21) between the groups.

Conclusions: Large-volume paracentesis was associated with a higher risk of AEs without additional efficacy in terms of symptom control. SVD appears to be a safer and equally effective option, especially for patients with low serum albumin. These findings support a conservative and individualized approach to fluid removal in patients with MA.

胃肠道肿瘤合并恶性腹水患者小、大容量穿刺安全性及不良事件危险因素的回顾性研究
背景:恶性腹水(MA)穿刺的最佳引流量尚未确定,确定穿刺的危险因素可作为MA患者临床决定引流量的指导。因此,本研究的目的是比较MA患者小容量引流(SVD)与大容量引流(LVD)的安全性,并确定不良事件(ae)的危险因素。方法:本研究为单中心回顾性研究,分析2014年至2023年间接受穿刺术治疗的胃肠道肿瘤患者。结果:89例符合条件的患者中,58例接受SVD, 31例接受LVD。LVD组ae的发生率明显高于SVD组(41.9% vs. 20.7%, P=0.04),特别是低血压组(12.9% vs. 1.7%, P=0.04)。结论:在症状控制方面,大容量穿刺术与不良事件的高风险相关,但没有额外的疗效。SVD似乎是一种更安全、同样有效的选择,特别是对于低血清白蛋白的患者。这些发现支持对MA患者采用保守和个体化的液体清除方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of palliative medicine
Annals of palliative medicine Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
231
期刊介绍: Annals of Palliative Medicine (Ann Palliat Med; Print ISSN 2224-5820; Online ISSN 2224-5839) is an open access, international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly with both online and printed copies since 2012. The aim of the journal is to provide up-to-date and cutting-edge information and professional support for health care providers in palliative medicine disciplines to improve the quality of life for patients and their families and caregivers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书