Pleural InfectionPROMPTNCT07550530
Role of Medical Thoracoscopy in Pleural Infection (PROMPT Trial)
A study testing medical thoracoscopy in people with Pleural Infection and Pleural Infections, run by Università Politecnica delle Marche.
Trial summary
The PROMPT study is testing whether an early keyhole procedure called Medical Thoracoscopy, which lets doctors look inside the chest and remove infected fluid, works better than current standard treatment (medicines to break up thick fluid) for people with pleural infection. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Pleural Infection, Pleural Infections, Pleural Infections and Inflammations
- What is being tested?
- medical thoracoscopy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 170 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Nov 2026to 31 Mar 2029
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults ≥ 18 years
- Clinical and radiological diagnosis of pleural infection (purulent, culture-positive, or pH < 7.2)
- Need of pleural drainage
- Able and willing to give informed consent
Who cannot join
- Chest drain in situ >24h before randomisation
- Post-traumatic pleural effusion
- Known allergy to fibrinolytic agents or contraindication to thoracoscopy
- Pregnancy or breastfeeding
- Life expectancy < 3 months from another illness
- Previous lung surgery (pneumonectomy) in the same side of pleural infection
- Previous pleurodesis in the same side of pleural infection
- Any contraindication to Medical thoracoscopy
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Multicentre Prospective Comparative Study of Medical Thoracoscopy vs Standard of Care in the Management of Pleural Infection
The PROMPT study is testing whether an early keyhole procedure called Medical Thoracoscopy, which lets doctors look inside the chest and remove infected fluid, works better than current standard treatment (medicines to break up thick fluid) for people with pleural infection. About 170 patients in several hospitals will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatments, and researchers will see which approach results in fewer additional procedures-such as another drain or surgery-within 30 days, as well as how quickly people recover and whether they experience any complications. Everyone in the study receives high-quality care, and the results will help doctors better understand which treatment gives patients the best chance of recovering quickly and safely
Read the detailed description
Pleural infection, also known as empyema or complicated parapneumonic effusion, occurs when infected fluid collects in the space between the lung and the chest wall. This condition can cause severe illness, requiring hospital admission for urgent treatment. Standard treatment usually involves antibiotics and the insertion of a chest tube to drain the infected fluid. In many cases, doctors also use medications called fibrinolytics (current gold standard treatment), which are delivered directly into the chest to help break up thick or separated pockets of fluid. While this treatment is effective for many people, around one-third of patients still do not fully recover with the initial approach and end up needing additional procedures or surgery. Because of this, doctors are looking for better ways to treat pleural infection earlier and more effectively.
One promising option is Medical Thoracoscopy, a minimally invasive procedure performed under local anaesthetic and conscious sedation. Through a small incision, doctors insert a camera into the chest to directly see and treat the infection. They can remove thick or loculated fluid, release adhesions, clean the pleural cavity more thoroughly, and place a larger drain under direct vision. Previous observational studies have suggested that performing thoracoscopy early in the illness may reduce the need for surgery later on. However, high-quality research comparing this approach with current standard care is still limited, and existing studies have faced challenges such as delays in timing and the use of surrogate outcomes rather than clinical ones. For this reason, more reliable evidence is needed to understand whether early Medical Thoracoscopy truly offers better results than fibrinolyitics.
The PROMPT trial ("Prospective study on the Role Of Medical thoracoscopy versus standard care in Pleural infecTion") has been designed to answer this important question. The study will take place across different hospitals in Italy, all of which have experience managing pleural disease and performing thoracoscopy. A total of 170 adult patients who are admitted to hospital with pleural infection and need drainage will be invited to take part. Everyone who agrees to join the study will be randomly allocated-like the flip of a coin-to receive either early Medical Thoracoscopy or standard care. This randomisation ensures that the comparison between treatments is fair, balanced, and unbiased.
Participants will be randomised either in the Medical Thoracoscopy arm or in the standard of care arm (fibrinolytics) within 24 hours after treatment failure of chest drain and medical therapy (i.e. antibiotics). In those who will be randomised in the Medical Thoracoscopy group, doctors will enter the chest cavity using a thin camera, break down any pockets of infected fluid, remove pus or debris, and place a chest drain. All patients will receive standard antibiotic treatment + chest drain placement recommended by current medical guidelines. Participants in the Standard Care group will receive fibrinolytic therapy (based on the well-established MIST-2 protocol). Urokinase may be used at centres where tPA and DNase are not routinely accessible. Both groups will receive the same supportive treatments, such as pain relief, physiotherapy, and oxygen if needed.
The main goal of the PROMPT trial is to determine whether early Medical Thoracoscopy reduces the need for additional procedures within the first 30 days. Additional procedures may include another chest drain, another course of fibrinolytics, or referral to surgery if the infection does not improve. The study is also interested in other important outcomes such as length of hospital stay, whether patients eventually require surgery, pain levels after treatment, side effects or complications, and survival up to 90 days. These outcomes are patient-centred and reflect the aspects of care that matter most to people facing this serious illness.
To ensure safety, all participants will be monitored carefully throughout their hospital stay and during follow-up visits at 30 and 90 days. A Data Monitoring Committee-independent of the research team-will regularly review safety information. If unexpected problems arise or if one treatment proves clearly superior or harmful, the committee has the authority to recommend changes or even stop the trial early. Ethical approval will be obtained before the trial begins, and all participants will provide written informed consent after receiving clear explanations of the study.
Every patient's personal information will be handled securely and confidentially according to European data protection regulations (GDPR). Only authorised members of the research team will have access to identifying information, and any data used for analysis will be anonymised. After the main results are published, the researchers plan to share anonymised datasets with other scientists who request access for further non-commercial research, helping to advance medical understanding while protecting participant privacy.
The PROMPT trial is expected to run for a total of 24 months, including recruitment and follow-up. No commercial funding is involved, ensuring that the study is entirely independent. Once completed, the research team will publish the results in peer-reviewed scientific journals, present them at conferences, and provide a plain-language summary so participants and the public can understand the findings.
Ultimately, the PROMPT study aims to provide clear, high-quality evidence about the best early treatment for pleural infection. If early Medical Thoracoscopy proves more effective than standard care, it could improve recovery, reduce the need for surgery, shorten hospital stays, and enhance the overall quality of care for patients facing this serious and often debilitating condition.
- Being tested
- medical thoracoscopy, Standard of Care
- Keywords
- Pleural infection, Medical Thoracoscopy, Trial
- Medical subject headings
- Inflammation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
medical thoracoscopyProcedure or surgery
This is a minimally invasive procedure performed to directly treat pleural infection by entering the pleural cavity through a small incision in the chest wall.
It is carried out under local anaesthesia combined with conscious sedation. This means the patient remains comfortable and relaxed but does not require general anaesthesia. A trained chest physician or interventional pulmonologist performs the procedure, usually inside a dedicated interventional pulmonology or endoscopy suite.
A small cut (usually 1-2 cm) is made on the side of the chest. Through this opening, the doctor inserts a rigid or semi-rigid thoracoscope-a thin tube equipped with a camera and light source. This allows direct visualisation of the pleural space, enabling the doctor to identify pockets of infected fluid, adhesions, or fibrinous strands that might prevent effective drainage.
Standard of CareProcedure or surgery
Also called Antibiotics + fibrinolytics
The Standard of Care (SoC) for pleural infection in this trial consists of image-guided chest drainage and systemic antibiotics + fibinolytics. An image-guided chest drain of at least 12 French is inserted using ultrasound or CT to remove infected fluid from the pleural space. Antibiotics are administered according to current guidelines. Drain management and supportive care follow institutional standards, and additional procedures are permitted only if predefined criteria for treatment failure are met. To improve drainage, participants are given intrapleural fibrinolytics according to the MIST-2 protocol: tPA 10 mg plus DNase 5 mg twice daily for 3 days. If tPA/DNase is not available, urokinase may be used instead following local routine practice (typically 100,000 IU in a single daily dose for up to two days). Drain management and supportive care follow institutional standards, and additional procedures are permitted only if predefined criteria for treatment failure are met.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Medical Thoracoscopy (MT) | Experimental | * Performed under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (anaesthesiologic assistance).
* Procedures include evacuation of infected fluid, breakdown of adhesions, and partial decortication if required.
* A 20 F or larger drain is inserted post-procedure and connected to an underwater seal.
* Standard antibiotic therapy as per guidelines. Receives: Procedure: medical thoracoscopy |
| Standard of Care (SoC) | Active comparator | • Intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy: tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) 10 mg + DNase 5 mg twice daily for 3 days (per MIST-2 protocol(2)), when available, otherwise Urokinase as per routine clinical practice (i.e., 100.000UI in single administration/two days). Receives: Procedure: Standard of Care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Further pleural interventions
Need for any further pleural procedure within 30 days (repeat thoracentesis or drainage, additional fibrinolytic course, or surgery).
Measured: from the randomization up to 30 days
Secondary outcomes (5)
Hospital length of stay
days from admission up to 90 days (end of the study)
Measured: from the randomization up to the end of study at 90 days
Surgical referral
Need for surgical thoracoscopy (VATS) up to 90 days (end of the study)
Measured: from the randomization to the end of study at 90 days
Mortality
30- and 90-day mortality up to 90 days (end of the study)
Measured: From the randomization at 30 and 90 days
Patient-reported pain
Pain reported as per VAS (visual analogue scale) from 0 to 10 up to 90 days (end of the study)
Measured: From the intervention up to 90 days (end of the study)
Procedure-related adverse events
pain requiring whichever analgesia, pneumothorax and/or prolonged/persistent air leak -5days-, bleeding requiring intervention, UTI admission, cellulitis or chest wall infection at the port/chest tube site requiring antibiotic therapy, clinically significant subcutaneous emphysema up to 90 days (end of the study)
Measured: From the day of intervention up to 90 days (end of the study)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Apr 2026
- Study start1 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion31 Oct 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Mar 2029 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pleural InfectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 170 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Università Politecnica delle Marche
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Federico Mei, Università Politecnica delle Marche
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07550530
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PROMPT2026
- Acronym
- PROMPT
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 26 Mar 2026
- Last updated
- 24 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Wang K, Yang L, Tian P, Tan F, Liu D, Li W. Medical thoracoscopy combined with intrapleural injection of urokinase for treatment of pleural infection-a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study: study protocol. Respir Res. 2025 Jan 18;26(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12931-025-03106-y.
PubMed 39827129Roberts ME, Rahman NM, Maskell NA, Bibby AC, Blyth KG, Corcoran JP, Edey A, Evison M, de Fonseka D, Hallifax R, Harden S, Lawrie I, Lim E, McCracken D, Mercer R, Mishra EK, Nicholson AG, Noorzad F, Opstad KS, Parsonage M, Stanton AE, Walker S. British Thoracic Society Guideline for pleural disease. Thorax. 2023 Nov;78(11):1143-1156. doi: 10.1136/thorax-2023-220304. Epub 2023 Aug 8. No abstract available.
PubMed 37553157Kheir F, Thakore S, Mehta H, Jantz M, Parikh M, Chee A, Kaphle U, Sisnega C, Fernandez-Bussy S, Majid A. Intrapleural Fibrinolytic Therapy versus Early Medical Thoracoscopy for Treatment of Pleural Infection. Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Aug;17(8):958-964. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202001-076OC.
PubMed 32421353Rahman NM, Maskell NA, West A, Teoh R, Arnold A, Mackinlay C, Peckham D, Davies CW, Ali N, Kinnear W, Bentley A, Kahan BC, Wrightson JM, Davies HE, Hooper CE, Lee YC, Hedley EL, Crosthwaite N, Choo L, Helm EJ, Gleeson FV, Nunn AJ, Davies RJ. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):518-26. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1012740.
PubMed 21830966Gonnelli F, Bonifazi M, Iommi M, Sediari M, Cirilli L, DiMarcoBerardino A, Zuccatosta L, Fantin A, Tomassetti S, Trigiani M, Marchetti G, Poletti V, Ravaglia C, Sorino C, Scala R, Balbo PE, Paracchini E, Tamburrini M, Papi A, Carpagnano GE, Intiglietta P, Pinelli V, Puppo G, Balestro E, Daverio M, Mondoni M, Carlucci P, Lacedonia D, Vancheri C, Impellizzeri P, Carle F, Gesuita R, Mei F. Italian multicentre study on the management of pLeural infection and empyema: IMPLE study. Respir Res. 2025 Nov 16;26(1):322. doi: 10.1186/s12931-025-03391-7.
PubMed 41243095
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Multicentre Prospective Comparative Study of Medical Thoracoscopy vs Standard of Care in the Management of Pleural Infection
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07550530
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PROMPT / PROMPT2026
- Keywords
- Pleural infection, Medical Thoracoscopy, Trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 170 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Università Politecnica delle MarcheUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 31 Oct 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Mar 2029 (estimated)
- First posted
- 24 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The PROMPT study is testing whether an early keyhole procedure called Medical Thoracoscopy, which lets doctors look inside the chest and remove infected fluid, works better than current standard treatment (medicines to break up thick fluid) for people with pleural infection. About 170 patients in several hospitals will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatments, and researchers will see which approach results in fewer additional procedures-such as another drain or surgery-within 30 days, as well as how quickly people recover and whether they experience any complications. Everyone in the study receives high-quality care, and the results will help doctors better understand which treatment gives patients the best chance of recovering quickly and safely
Detailed description
Pleural infection, also known as empyema or complicated parapneumonic effusion, occurs when infected fluid collects in the space between the lung and the chest wall. This condition can cause severe illness, requiring hospital admission for urgent treatment. Standard treatment usually involves antibiotics and the insertion of a chest tube to drain the infected fluid. In many cases, doctors also use medications called fibrinolytics (current gold standard treatment), which are delivered directly into the chest to help break up thick or separated pockets of fluid. While this treatment is effective for many people, around one-third of patients still do not fully recover with the initial approach and end up needing additional procedures or surgery. Because of this, doctors are looking for better ways to treat pleural infection earlier and more effectively.
One promising option is Medical Thoracoscopy, a minimally invasive procedure performed under local anaesthetic and conscious sedation. Through a small incision, doctors insert a camera into the chest to directly see and treat the infection. They can remove thick or loculated fluid, release adhesions, clean the pleural cavity more thoroughly, and place a larger drain under direct vision. Previous observational studies have suggested that performing thoracoscopy early in the illness may reduce the need for surgery later on. However, high-quality research comparing this approach with current standard care is still limited, and existing studies have faced challenges such as delays in timing and the use of surrogate outcomes rather than clinical ones. For this reason, more reliable evidence is needed to understand whether early Medical Thoracoscopy truly offers better results than fibrinolyitics.
The PROMPT trial ("Prospective study on the Role Of Medical thoracoscopy versus standard care in Pleural infecTion") has been designed to answer this important question. The study will take place across different hospitals in Italy, all of which have experience managing pleural disease and performing thoracoscopy. A total of 170 adult patients who are admitted to hospital with pleural infection and need drainage will be invited to take part. Everyone who agrees to join the study will be randomly allocated-like the flip of a coin-to receive either early Medical Thoracoscopy or standard care. This randomisation ensures that the comparison between treatments is fair, balanced, and unbiased.
Participants will be randomised either in the Medical Thoracoscopy arm or in the standard of care arm (fibrinolytics) within 24 hours after treatment failure of chest drain and medical therapy (i.e. antibiotics). In those who will be randomised in the Medical Thoracoscopy group, doctors will enter the chest cavity using a thin camera, break down any pockets of infected fluid, remove pus or debris, and place a chest drain. All patients will receive standard antibiotic treatment + chest drain placement recommended by current medical guidelines. Participants in the Standard Care group will receive fibrinolytic therapy (based on the well-established MIST-2 protocol). Urokinase may be used at centres where tPA and DNase are not routinely accessible. Both groups will receive the same supportive treatments, such as pain relief, physiotherapy, and oxygen if needed.
The main goal of the PROMPT trial is to determine whether early Medical Thoracoscopy reduces the need for additional procedures within the first 30 days. Additional procedures may include another chest drain, another course of fibrinolytics, or referral to surgery if the infection does not improve. The study is also interested in other important outcomes such as length of hospital stay, whether patients eventually require surgery, pain levels after treatment, side effects or complications, and survival up to 90 days. These outcomes are patient-centred and reflect the aspects of care that matter most to people facing this serious illness.
To ensure safety, all participants will be monitored carefully throughout their hospital stay and during follow-up visits at 30 and 90 days. A Data Monitoring Committee-independent of the research team-will regularly review safety information. If unexpected problems arise or if one treatment proves clearly superior or harmful, the committee has the authority to recommend changes or even stop the trial early. Ethical approval will be obtained before the trial begins, and all participants will provide written informed consent after receiving clear explanations of the study.
Every patient's personal information will be handled securely and confidentially according to European data protection regulations (GDPR). Only authorised members of the research team will have access to identifying information, and any data used for analysis will be anonymised. After the main results are published, the researchers plan to share anonymised datasets with other scientists who request access for further non-commercial research, helping to advance medical understanding while protecting participant privacy.
The PROMPT trial is expected to run for a total of 24 months, including recruitment and follow-up. No commercial funding is involved, ensuring that the study is entirely independent. Once completed, the research team will publish the results in peer-reviewed scientific journals, present them at conferences, and provide a plain-language summary so participants and the public can understand the findings.
Ultimately, the PROMPT study aims to provide clear, high-quality evidence about the best early treatment for pleural infection. If early Medical Thoracoscopy proves more effective than standard care, it could improve recovery, reduce the need for surgery, shorten hospital stays, and enhance the overall quality of care for patients facing this serious and often debilitating condition.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Medical Thoracoscopy (MT) | Experimental | Procedure: medical thoracoscopy* Performed under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (anaesthesiologic assistance). * Procedures include evacuation of infected fluid, breakdown of adhesions, and partial decortication if required. * A 20 F or larger drain is inserted post-procedure and connected to an underwater seal. * Standard antibiotic therapy as per guidelines. |
| Standard of Care (SoC) | Active comparator | Procedure: Standard of Care• Intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy: tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) 10 mg + DNase 5 mg twice daily for 3 days (per MIST-2 protocol(2)), when available, otherwise Urokinase as per routine clinical practice (i.e., 100.000UI in single administration/two days). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Adults ≥ 18 years
- Clinical and radiological diagnosis of pleural infection (purulent, culture-positive, or pH < 7.2)
- Need of pleural drainage
- Able and willing to give informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Chest drain in situ >24h before randomisation
- Post-traumatic pleural effusion
- Known allergy to fibrinolytic agents or contraindication to thoracoscopy
- Pregnancy or breastfeeding
- Life expectancy < 3 months from another illness
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| medical thoracoscopyThis is a minimally invasive procedure performed to directly treat pleural infection by entering the pleural cavity through a small incision in the chest wall. It is carried out under local anaesthesia combined with conscious sedation. This means the patient remains comfortable and relaxed but does not require general anaesthesia. A trained chest physician or interventional pulmonologist performs the procedure, usually inside a dedicated interventional pulmonology or endoscopy suite. A small cut (usually 1-2 cm) is made on the side of the chest. Through this opening, the doctor inserts a rigid or semi-rigid thoracoscope-a thin tube equipped with a camera and light source. This allows direct visualisation of the pleural space, enabling the doctor to identify pockets of infected fluid, adhesions, or fibrinous strands that might prevent effective drainage. | Procedure or surgery | Medical Thoracoscopy (MT) |
| Standard of CareAlso: Antibiotics + fibrinolyticsThe Standard of Care (SoC) for pleural infection in this trial consists of image-guided chest drainage and systemic antibiotics + fibinolytics. An image-guided chest drain of at least 12 French is inserted using ultrasound or CT to remove infected fluid from the pleural space. Antibiotics are administered according to current guidelines. Drain management and supportive care follow institutional standards, and additional procedures are permitted only if predefined criteria for treatment failure are met. To improve drainage, participants are given intrapleural fibrinolytics according to the MIST-2 protocol: tPA 10 mg plus DNase 5 mg twice daily for 3 days. If tPA/DNase is not available, urokinase may be used instead following local routine practice (typically 100,000 IU in a single daily dose for up to two days). Drain management and supportive care follow institutional standards, and additional procedures are permitted only if predefined criteria for treatment failure are met. | Procedure or surgery | Standard of Care (SoC) |
Primary outcome
Further pleural interventions
Time frame: from the randomization up to 30 days
Need for any further pleural procedure within 30 days (repeat thoracentesis or drainage, additional fibrinolytic course, or surgery).
5 secondary outcomes
Hospital length of stay
Time frame: from the randomization up to the end of study at 90 days
Surgical referral
Time frame: from the randomization to the end of study at 90 days
Mortality
Time frame: From the randomization at 30 and 90 days
Patient-reported pain
Time frame: From the intervention up to 90 days (end of the study)
Procedure-related adverse events
Time frame: From the day of intervention up to 90 days (end of the study)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Apr 2026.
- Results publication: PubMed 39827129Wang K, Yang L, Tian P, Tan F, Liu D, Li W. Medical thoracoscopy combined with intrapleural injection of urokinase for treatment of pleural infection-a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study: study protocol. Respir Res. 2025 Jan 18;26(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12931-025-03106-y.
- Results publication: PubMed 37553157Roberts ME, Rahman NM, Maskell NA, Bibby AC, Blyth KG, Corcoran JP, Edey A, Evison M, de Fonseka D, Hallifax R, Harden S, Lawrie I, Lim E, McCracken D, Mercer R, Mishra EK, Nicholson AG, Noorzad F, Opstad KS, Parsonage M, Stanton AE, Walker S. British Thoracic Society Guideline for pleural disease. Thorax. 2023 Nov;78(11):1143-1156. doi: 10.1136/thorax-2023-220304. Epub 2023 Aug 8. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 32421353Kheir F, Thakore S, Mehta H, Jantz M, Parikh M, Chee A, Kaphle U, Sisnega C, Fernandez-Bussy S, Majid A. Intrapleural Fibrinolytic Therapy versus Early Medical Thoracoscopy for Treatment of Pleural Infection. Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Aug;17(8):958-964. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202001-076OC.
- Results publication: PubMed 21830966Rahman NM, Maskell NA, West A, Teoh R, Arnold A, Mackinlay C, Peckham D, Davies CW, Ali N, Kinnear W, Bentley A, Kahan BC, Wrightson JM, Davies HE, Hooper CE, Lee YC, Hedley EL, Crosthwaite N, Choo L, Helm EJ, Gleeson FV, Nunn AJ, Davies RJ. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):518-26. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1012740.
- Results publication: PubMed 41243095Gonnelli F, Bonifazi M, Iommi M, Sediari M, Cirilli L, DiMarcoBerardino A, Zuccatosta L, Fantin A, Tomassetti S, Trigiani M, Marchetti G, Poletti V, Ravaglia C, Sorino C, Scala R, Balbo PE, Paracchini E, Tamburrini M, Papi A, Carpagnano GE, Intiglietta P, Pinelli V, Puppo G, Balestro E, Daverio M, Mondoni M, Carlucci P, Lacedonia D, Vancheri C, Impellizzeri P, Carle F, Gesuita R, Mei F. Italian multicentre study on the management of pLeural infection and empyema: IMPLE study. Respir Res. 2025 Nov 16;26(1):322. doi: 10.1186/s12931-025-03391-7.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Pleural Infection
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
A Beta-only IL-2 ImmunoTherapY Study
Advanced Solid Tumor, Unresectable Solid Tumor
RecruitingObservational study
Pneumonia and Pleuropneumonia in Hospitalized Children
Pneumonia, Pleural Effusion
RecruitingPhase 4
VATS or Intrapleural Enzymatic Therapy for Patients With Empyema.
Empyema, Pleural, Pleural Infections
RecruitingObservational study
UNC Pleural Fluid Registry
Lung Cancer, Lung Infection
Not yet recruiting
Evaluating Antibiotic Course Upon Adequate Treatment of Empyema
Pleural Empyema
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing medical thoracoscopy in people with Pleural Infection and Pleural Infections, run by Università Politecnica delle Marche.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Federico Mei, MD (+0715965538, f.mei@staff.univpm.it), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Further pleural interventions (time frame: from the randomization up to 30 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07550530, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Apr 2026.