Pleural EffusionECHOPLEVNCT02505763
Thoracic Ultrasound in the Treatment of Pleural Effusion
A study testing Strategy with thoracic ultrasound in people with Pleural Effusion, run by University Hospital, Toulouse at 1 site in France.
Trial summary
The main objective of the study is to assess the cost-effectiveness ratio of two management strategies of pleurisy in adults : a strategy by systematic thoracic ultrasound versus a strategy without thoracic ultrasound. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Pleural Effusion
- What is being tested?
- Strategy with thoracic ultrasound
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 127 participants
- Where
- 1 siteFrance
- Study dates
- 10 Jul 2017to 2 Sep 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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
- Patients hospitalized or seen in consultation with pleural effusion diagnosed clinically or radiologically whatever be its initial management.
Who cannot join
- Patient with a neoplasia
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Treatment of Pleural Effusion by Routine Thoracic Ultrasound
The main objective of the study is to assess the cost-effectiveness ratio of two management strategies of pleurisy in adults : a strategy by systematic thoracic ultrasound versus a strategy without thoracic ultrasound.
Read the detailed description
Comparison of two management strategies pleural effusions from diagnosis and during the first year of follow up care.
Patients are randomized into two groups, each group receiving a different management strategy.
Both strategies are compared:
Strategy A that involves the systematic use of thoracic ultrasound for the treatment of pleural effusion, treatment and follow up care. It will be possible to have recourse to other tests (such as chest CT) if deemed necessary by the practitioner.
Strategy B, which consists of the usual care pleurisy and thus without use of ultrasound: gestures are guided either by chest radiograph or by CT chest as necessary in the treatment and monitoring. A systematic radiographic pleural after each gesture is performed.
The management is inspired by the English recommendations currently validated and applied in Anglo-Saxon countries.
- Conditions
- Pleural Effusion
- Being tested
- Strategy with thoracic ultrasound
- Medical subject headings
- Pleural Effusion
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Strategy with thoracic ultrasoundProcedure or surgery
This strategy involves the systematic use of thoracic ultrasound for the treatment of pleural effusion, treatment and follow up care.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Strategy with thoracic ultrasound | Experimental | * Use of thoracic ultrasound for the treatment of pleural effusion, treatment and monitoring.
* Use of other examinations like chest CT if necessary Receives: Procedure: Strategy with thoracic ultrasound |
| Strategy without thoracic ultrasound | No intervention | * Usual care : without thoracic ultrasound * Use of chest radiography or chest CT scan if necessary, as for treatment and monitoring. Usual care: without the use of ultrasound Using either chest radiography or TDM if necessary, as for treatment and monitoring. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The cost-effectiveness ration
Cost estimates will be conducted from the perspective of health insurance. The expenses incurred in the care of patients with pleurisy will be counted in both groups during the follow-up year.
The effectiveness will be assessed against the complications of strategy (pneumothorax, respiratory sequelae, surgery, mortality, chest pain sequelae, radiological consequences).
Measured: 1 year
Secondary outcomes (1)
The duration of hospitalization
number of day of hospitalization between the two strategies
Measured: 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Jul 2015 (estimated)
- Study start10 Jul 2017
- Primary completion2 Sep 2020
- Study completion2 Sep 2020
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 EffusionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Hospital, ToulouseThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- 127 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Toulouse
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Elise NOEL-SAVINA, MD, Principal investigator, University Hospital, Toulouse
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02505763
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- RC31/14/7418
- Acronym
- ECHOPLEV
- Status last verified
- Nov 2026
- First submitted
- 21 Jul 2015
- Last updated
- 5 Nov 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Havelock T, Teoh R, Laws D, Gleeson F; BTS Pleural Disease Guideline Group. Pleural procedures and thoracic ultrasound: British Thoracic Society Pleural Disease Guideline 2010. Thorax. 2010 Aug;65 Suppl 2:ii61-76. doi: 10.1136/thx.2010.137026. No abstract available.
PubMed 20696688Reissig A, Copetti R, Mathis G, Mempel C, Schuler A, Zechner P, Aliberti S, Neumann R, Kroegel C, Hoyer H. Lung ultrasound in the diagnosis and follow-up of community-acquired pneumonia: a prospective, multicenter, diagnostic accuracy study. Chest. 2012 Oct;142(4):965-972. doi: 10.1378/chest.12-0364.
PubMed 22700780Jones PW, Moyers JP, Rogers JT, Rodriguez RM, Lee YC, Light RW. Ultrasound-guided thoracentesis: is it a safer method? Chest. 2003 Feb;123(2):418-23. doi: 10.1378/chest.123.2.418.
PubMed 12576360Ikezoe J, Morimoto S, Arisawa J, Takashima S, Kozuka T, Nakahara K. Percutaneous biopsy of thoracic lesions: value of sonography for needle guidance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990 Jun;154(6):1181-5. doi: 10.2214/ajr.154.6.2110724.
PubMed 2110724Chen HJ, Yu YH, Tu CY, Chen CH, Hsia TC, Tsai KD, Shih CM, Hsu WH. Ultrasound in peripheral pulmonary air-fluid lesions. Color Doppler imaging as an aid in differentiating empyema and abscess. Chest. 2009 Jun;135(6):1426-1432. doi: 10.1378/chest.08-2188. Epub 2009 Mar 2.
PubMed 19255298
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Nov 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Treatment of Pleural Effusion by Routine Thoracic Ultrasound
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02505763
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ECHOPLEV / RC31/14/7418
- Conditions
- Pleural Effusion
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 127 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, ToulouseUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 10 Jul 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 2 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 2 Sep 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Jul 2015 (estimated)
- 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 main objective of the study is to assess the cost-effectiveness ratio of two management strategies of pleurisy in adults : a strategy by systematic thoracic ultrasound versus a strategy without thoracic ultrasound.
Detailed description
Comparison of two management strategies pleural effusions from diagnosis and during the first year of follow up care.
Patients are randomized into two groups, each group receiving a different management strategy.
Both strategies are compared:
Strategy A that involves the systematic use of thoracic ultrasound for the treatment of pleural effusion, treatment and follow up care. It will be possible to have recourse to other tests (such as chest CT) if deemed necessary by the practitioner.
Strategy B, which consists of the usual care pleurisy and thus without use of ultrasound: gestures are guided either by chest radiograph or by CT chest as necessary in the treatment and monitoring. A systematic radiographic pleural after each gesture is performed.
The management is inspired by the English recommendations currently validated and applied in Anglo-Saxon countries.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Strategy with thoracic ultrasound | Experimental | Procedure: Strategy with thoracic ultrasound* Use of thoracic ultrasound for the treatment of pleural effusion, treatment and monitoring. * Use of other examinations like chest CT if necessary |
| Strategy without thoracic ultrasound | No intervention | –* Usual care : without thoracic ultrasound * Use of chest radiography or chest CT scan if necessary, as for treatment and monitoring. Usual care: without the use of ultrasound Using either chest radiography or TDM if necessary, as for treatment and monitoring. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients hospitalized or seen in consultation with pleural effusion diagnosed clinically or radiologically whatever be its initial management.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patient with a neoplasia
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Strategy with thoracic ultrasoundThis strategy involves the systematic use of thoracic ultrasound for the treatment of pleural effusion, treatment and follow up care. | Procedure or surgery | Strategy with thoracic ultrasound |
Primary outcome
The cost-effectiveness ration
Time frame: 1 year
Cost estimates will be conducted from the perspective of health insurance. The expenses incurred in the care of patients with pleurisy will be counted in both groups during the follow-up year. The effectiveness will be assessed against the complications of strategy (pneumothorax, respiratory sequelae, surgery, mortality, chest pain sequelae, radiological consequences).
1 secondary outcome
The duration of hospitalization
Time frame: 1 year
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Nov 2026.
- Background: PubMed 20696688Havelock T, Teoh R, Laws D, Gleeson F; BTS Pleural Disease Guideline Group. Pleural procedures and thoracic ultrasound: British Thoracic Society Pleural Disease Guideline 2010. Thorax. 2010 Aug;65 Suppl 2:ii61-76. doi: 10.1136/thx.2010.137026. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 22700780Reissig A, Copetti R, Mathis G, Mempel C, Schuler A, Zechner P, Aliberti S, Neumann R, Kroegel C, Hoyer H. Lung ultrasound in the diagnosis and follow-up of community-acquired pneumonia: a prospective, multicenter, diagnostic accuracy study. Chest. 2012 Oct;142(4):965-972. doi: 10.1378/chest.12-0364.
- Background: PubMed 12576360Jones PW, Moyers JP, Rogers JT, Rodriguez RM, Lee YC, Light RW. Ultrasound-guided thoracentesis: is it a safer method? Chest. 2003 Feb;123(2):418-23. doi: 10.1378/chest.123.2.418.
- Background: PubMed 2110724Ikezoe J, Morimoto S, Arisawa J, Takashima S, Kozuka T, Nakahara K. Percutaneous biopsy of thoracic lesions: value of sonography for needle guidance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990 Jun;154(6):1181-5. doi: 10.2214/ajr.154.6.2110724.
- Background: PubMed 19255298Chen HJ, Yu YH, Tu CY, Chen CH, Hsia TC, Tsai KD, Shih CM, Hsu WH. Ultrasound in peripheral pulmonary air-fluid lesions. Color Doppler imaging as an aid in differentiating empyema and abscess. Chest. 2009 Jun;135(6):1426-1432. doi: 10.1378/chest.08-2188. Epub 2009 Mar 2.
Related trials for Pleural Effusion
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Union-LC-MPE Cohort:A Multicenter Cohort Study on Diagnosis and Prognosis of Malignant Pleural Effusion in Lung Cance
Malignant Pleural Effusions (Mpe), Lung Cancer (Diagnosis)
RecruitingObservational study
Pneumonia and Pleuropneumonia in Hospitalized Children
Pneumonia, Pleural Effusion
Not yet recruiting
Iodine Starch Test Use in Pleuroperitoneal Leak
Peritoneal Dialysis, Peritoneal Dialysis (PD)
RecruitingObservational study
UNC Pleural Fluid Registry
Lung Cancer, Lung Infection
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Intrapleural Catheter Daily Versus Three Times a Week Drainage
Advanced Cancer, Pleural Effusion
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. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Elise NOEL-SAVINA, MD principal investigator
University Hospital, Toulouse
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Strategy with thoracic ultrasound in people with Pleural Effusion, run by University Hospital, Toulouse at 1 site in France.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Nov 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in France. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The cost-effectiveness ration (time frame: 1 year). 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 NCT02505763, 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 5 Nov 2026.