Postoperative pulmonary complications and thoracocentesis associated with early versus late chest tube removal after thoracic esophagectomy with three-field dissection: a propensity score matching analysis

Single chest drain is not inferior to double chest drain after robotic esophagectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis

Background

Chest drain management has a significant influence on postoperative recovery after robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). The use of chest drains increases postoperative pain by irritating intercostal nerves and hinders patients from early postoperative mobilization and recovery. To our knowledge, no study has investigated the use of two vs. one intercostal chest drains after RAMIE.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients undergoing elective RAMIE with gastric conduit pull-up and intrathoracic anastomosis. Patients were divided into two groups according to placement of one (11/2020-08/2022) or two (08/2018-11/2020) chest drains. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio, and the incidences of overall and pulmonary complications, drainage-associated re-interventions, radiological diagnostics, analgesic use, and length of hospital stay were compared between single drain and double drain groups.

Results

During the study period, 194 patients underwent RAMIE. Twenty-two patients were included after propensity score matching in the single and double chest drain group, respectively. Time until removal of the last chest drain [postoperative day (POD) 6.7 ± 4.4 vs. POD 9.4 ± 2.7, p = 0.004] and intensive care unit stay (4.2 ± 5.1 days vs. 5.3 ± 3.5 days, p = 0.01) were significantly shorter in the single drain group. Overall and pulmonary complications, drainage-associated events, re-interventions, number of diagnostic imaging, analgesic use, and length of hospital stay were comparable between both groups.

Conclusion

This study is the first to demonstrate the safety of single intercostal chest drain use and, at least, non-inferiority to double chest drains in terms of perioperative complications after RAMIE.

Drainless robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy-randomized controlled trial (RESPECT)

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this randomized trial is to evaluate the early removal of postoperative drains after robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE). Evidence is lacking about feasibility, associated pain, recovery, and morbidity.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a randomized controlled multicentric trial involving 72 patients undergoing RAMIE. Patients will be allocated into two groups. The "intervention" group consists of 36 patients. In this group, abdominal and chest drains are removed 3 h after the end of surgery in the absence of contraindications. The control group consists of 36 patients with conventional chest drain management. These drains are removed during the further postoperative course according to a standard algorithm. The primary objective is to investigate whether postoperative pain measured by NRS on the second postoperative day can be significantly reduced in the intervention group. Secondary endpoints are the intensity of pain during the first week, analgesic use, number of postoperative chest X-ray and CT scans, interventions, postoperative mobilization (steps per day as measured with an activity tracker), postoperative morbidity and mortality.

DISCUSSION

Until now, there have been no trials investigating different intraoperative chest drain strategies in patients undergoing RAMIE for oesophageal cancer with regard to perioperative complications until discharge. Minimally invasive approaches combined with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols lower morbidity but still include the insertion of chest drains. Reduction and early removal have been proposed after pulmonary surgery but not after RAMIE. The study concept is based on our own experience and the promising current results of the RAMIE procedure. Therefore, the presented randomized controlled trial will provide statistical evidence of the effectiveness and feasibility of the "drainless" RAMIE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05553795. Registered on 23 September 2022.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for esophagectomy

A perioperative treatment protocol, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) focuses on accelerating patient recovery. Previous studies confirmed that ERAS decreases surgical trauma and the stress response, which improved outcomes including reduced length of hospital stay (LOS) and decreased postoperative morbidity. While ERAS protocols have been successfully implemented in a variety of surgical disciplines (colorectal, bariatric, orthopedic, and gynecologic surgery), its use in esophageal surgery is still limited. This paper analyzes the feasibility and value of the ERAS protocol for esophageal surgery. Reviewing the literature found that implementation of ERAS resulted in decreased costs, length of stay and pulmonary specific complication reduction, but not overall morbidity. The evidence lacks randomized control trials. Further, the ERAS Society published recommendations for esophageal resection. This opportunity for unification of the protocol would make the studies more comparable and leads to stronger conclusions. Surgery specific items also require further confirmation. Nonetheless, the successful introduction of the ERAS protocol into a wide variety of surgical disciplines provides optimism for ERAS's effectiveness in esophageal surgery.