Management of Pediatric Patients With Spontaneous Pneumomediastinum: A Retrospective Chart Review
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
PURPOSE: Given the paucity of data on pediatric spontaneous pneumomediastinum (SPM), management is largely informed by extrapolation from adult studies or personal clinical experience, resulting in significant heterogeneity. The purpose of this study was to describe how pediatric patients with SPM are clinically managed at our institution and propose a treatment algorithm. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of pediatric patients with SPM from April 2002 to December 2021 at a single Canadian tertiary care center. Data on medical history, presentation characteristics, clinical management, and complications were gathered. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze data. RESULTS: We identified 63 patients for inclusion, median age was 15 years. Twenty-nine patients were transferred from another facility. Most common presenting symptoms were chest pain (72.3%), shortness of breath (44.6%), and subcutaneous emphysema (21.5%). Initial workup included chest x-ray (93.6%), CT scan (20.6%), and upper GI series (7.9%). There was no difference in the number of initial tests between admitted and discharged patients (p = 0.10). Of admitted patients (n = 35), 31.4% had primary SPM (no underlying comorbidity/inciting event) and 68.8% were secondary SPM (underlying comorbidity/inciting event). No patients with primary SPM developed complications or recurrences. In contrast, 16.7% of those with secondary SPM developed complications and 54.2% had at least one additional intervention after admission. DISCUSSION: There is significant variability in diagnostic investigation and treatment of pediatric SPM at our center. Amongst primary SPM, additional tests did not change complication rate or recurrence, including those transferred from another facility. An expeditious treatment algorithm is warranted. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective Cohort Study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
