Could skipping the chest tube be just as safe for a collapsed lung?
NCT ID NCT07331805
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study compares two approaches for treating a large primary spontaneous pneumothorax (collapsed lung) in stable adults: active observation (monitoring without an invasive procedure) versus standard chest tube drainage. About 436 participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups. The goal is to see if conservative management works just as well at fully re-expanding the lung by 8 weeks, while possibly causing fewer complications and shorter hospital stays.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- What this could lead to
- If successful, this could show that many people with a large collapsed lung can be safely managed without an invasive chest tube, reducing hospital stays and complications.
- What could go wrong
- This is an early-stage trial (not yet recruiting) with a non-inferiority design, so it may not prove conservative management is as effective. The condition can recur, and some patients may still need a chest tube if they worsen.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
About 436 people
The number the study aims to enrol. It can still change while the study runs.
- Expected to start
-
Jan 2026
An estimate. Start dates often move.
- Expected to finish
-
Nov 2028
An estimate. End dates often move.
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
18 to 60 years
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Not accepted
This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * Age: \>18 and ≤60 years at the time of enrollment. * Diagnosis: Primary spontaneous pneumothorax of large size (lung collapse ≥30% by the Collins method on chest X-ray). * Episode type: Any episode of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. * Clinical stability suitable for observation without immediate intervention: Systolic BP \>90 mmHg, heart rate \<140 bpm, oxygen saturation \>90% (with supplemental oxygen if needed), respiratory rate 15-30 breaths/min. * Consent: Has read and understood the participant information sheet and signed informed consent. Exclusion Criteria: * Pre-existing lung disease that may predispose to pneumothorax (e.g., COPD, cystic fibrosis, interstitial lung disease, tuberculosis, pulmonary neoplasm). * Indication for urgent thoracic surgery (e.g., imaging highly suggestive of giant bullae/blebs requiring immediate surgical intervention). * Pregnancy or breastfeeding.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Conservative management (active observation) are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
How to take part
Only the study team decides who joins. These are the ways to reach them.
-
The official record
ClinicalTrials.gov lists the study team's own contact details, including names and phone numbers. We don't republish those.
-
A doctor treating you
A doctor who knows your case can contact a study site on your behalf, and can tell you whether this study is worth pursuing at all.