Abstract

Abstract
Background: conservative management including oxygen therapy and analgesia may safely and effectively manage patients with spontaneous pneumothorax without hemodynamic compromise. The primary objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of conservative versus interventional care in the management of spontaneous pneumothorax.
Method: We conducted a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases till 2023 to find cohort studies and randomized controlled trials that compared interventional therapy with conservative care as the first line of treatment for patients experiencing spontaneous pneumothorax. Success and recurrence rates were the main objectives. The rates of complications were the secondary focus. Each reviewer carried out data extraction and quality evaluation individually from papers that qualified.
Results: after filtration of duplicated and ineligible articles we included 7 relevant research in the final systematic review. There were two randomized clinical trials, one prospective cohort research, four retrospective cohort studies, and a total of 1071 participants in the seven included investigations. Overall, success rates for 619 patients were reported in 5 included studies. The success rates of the interventional management group and the conservative management group did not differ statistically significantly. Difference in complication rates between the conservative and interventional therapy groups was not statistically significant, the conservative therapy group experienced fewer complications than the interventional treatment group.
Conclusion: In contrast to interventional care, conservative therapy provides a secure and efficient first line of treatment for individuals with spontaneous pneumothorax.

Key words: Oxygen supplementation, conservative management, spontaneous pneumothorax, systematic review.