Randomized Trial of an Improved Drainage Strategy Versus Routine Chest Tube After Lung Wedge Resection

Randomized Controlled Trial of Thresholds for Drain Removal After Anatomic Lung Resection

BACKGROUND

The criteria for chest drain removal after lung resections remain vague and rely on personal experience instead of evidence. Because pleural fluid resorption is proportional to body weight, a weight-related approach seems reasonable. We examined the feasibility of a weight-adjusted fluid output threshold concerning postoperative respiratory complications and the occurrence of symptomatic pleural effusion after chest drain removal. Our secondary objectives were the hospital length of stay and pain levels before and after chest drain removal.

METHODS

This was a single-center randomized controlled trial including 337 patients planned for open or thoracoscopic anatomical lung resections. Patients were randomly assigned postoperatively into 2 groups. The chest drain was removed in the study group according to a fluid output threshold calculated by the 5 mL × body weight (in kg)/24 hours formula. In the control group, our previous traditional fluid threshold of 200 mL/24 hours was applied.

RESULTS

No differences were evident regarding the occurrence of pleural effusion and dyspnea at discharge and 30 days postoperatively. In the logistic regression analysis, the surgical modality was a risk factor for other complications, and age was the only variable influencing postoperative dyspnea. Time to chest drain removal was identical in both groups, and time to discharge was shorter after open surgery in the test group.

CONCLUSIONS

No increased postoperative complications occurred with this weight-based formula, and a trend toward earlier discharge after open surgery was observed in the test group.

Perioperative outcomes of bi-pigtail catheter drainage strategy versus conventional chest tube after uniportal video-assisted thoracic lung surgery

OBJECTIVES

Chest tube (CT) drainage is a main cause of postoperative pain in lung surgery. Here, we introduced a novel drainage strategy with bi-pigtail catheters (PCs) and conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare with conventional CT drainage after uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery lung surgery.

METHODS

A single-centre, prospective, open-labelled, randomized controlled trial (ChiCTR2000035337) was conducted with a preplanned sample size of 396. The primary outcome was the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) on the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes included other indicators of postoperative pain, drainage volume, duration of drainage, postoperative hospital stay, incidence of postoperative complications, CT reinsertion and medical costs.

RESULTS

A total number of 396 patients were randomized between August 2020 and January 2021, 387 of whom were included in the final analysis. The baseline and clinical characteristics of the patients were well balanced between 2 groups. The NPRS on the first postoperative day was significantly lower in the PC group than in the CT group (2.40 ± 1.27 vs 3.02 ± 1.39, p < 0.001), as well as the second/third-day NPRS, the incidence of sudden severe pain (9/192, 4.7% vs 34/195, 17.4%, P < 0.001) and pain requiring intervention (19/192, 9.9% vs 46/195, 23.6%, P < 0.001). In addition, the medical cost in the PC group was lower (US$7809 ± 1646 vs US$8205 ± 1815, P = 0.025). Univariable and multivariable analyses revealed that the drainage strategy was the only factor influencing the incidence of pain requiring intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The drainage strategy with bi-PCs in patients undergoing uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery lung surgery alleviates postoperative pain with adequate safety and efficacy.

A novel drainage strategy using chest tube plus pleural catheter in uniportal upper lobectomy: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In this study we explored whether one pleural catheter plus single chest tube drainage could achieve a noninferior drainage effect when compared with the traditional two chest tubes in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for an upper pulmonary lobectomy.

METHODS

Patients that underwent an upper pulmonary lobectomy from January to November 2020 were enrolled in this single-center, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial. Prior to closure, patients were randomized to an intervention group who received an improved drainage strategy involving one pleural catheter with one chest tube (24 Fr), while traditional double chest tube drainage was applied for the control group.

RESULTS

A total of 390 patients entered the study, although 190 were excluded for changing nonuniportal surgical approaches or opting for nonlobectomy resections. Finally, 200 patients were randomized (100 in the intervention group and 100 in the control group). The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between the groups. The incidence of pneumothorax in the intervention and control groups was similar on postoperative Day 1 (noninferiority, 10% vs. 13%, p = 0.658). In addition, there were no significant differences in secondary outcomes such as incidence of pneumothorax by Day 30, postoperative chest tube/pleural catheter removal time, amount of drainage on Day 1, total amount of drainage after operation, or postoperative hospitalization. A significantly lower pain score was observed in the intervention group (3.33 ± 0.68 vs. 3.68 ± 0.94, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The new strategy is noninferior to double chest tube drainage after an upper pulmonary lobectomy offers superior pain control, and is recommended for an upper lobectomy by uniportal VATS.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes with or without routine chest tube drainage after video-assisted thoracoscopic pulmonary resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

In recent years, an increasing number of thoracic surgeons have attempted to apply no routine chest tube drainage (NT) strategy after thoracoscopic lung resection. However, the safety and feasibility of not routinely placing a chest tube after lung resection remain controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effect of NT strategy after thoracoscopic pulmonary resection on perioperative outcomes.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases until 3 January 2022 was performed to identify the studies that implemented NT strategy after thoracoscopic pulmonary resection. Perioperative outcomes were extracted by 2 reviewers independently and then synthesized using a random-effects model. Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) served as the summary statistics for meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were subsequently performed.

Results

A total of 12 studies with 1,381 patients were included. The meta-analysis indicated that patients in the NT group had a significantly reduced postoperative length of stay (LOS) (SMD = -0.91; 95% CI: -1.20 to -0.61; P &lt; 0.001) and pain score on postoperative day (POD) 1 (SMD = -0.95; 95% CI: -1.54 to -0.36; P = 0.002), POD 2 (SMD = -0.37; 95% CI: -0.63 to -0.11; P = 0.005), and POD 3 (SMD = -0.39; 95% CI: -0.71 to -0.06; P = 0.02). Further subgroup analysis showed that the difference of postoperative LOS became statistically insignificant in the lobectomy or segmentectomy subgroup (SMD = -0.30; 95% CI: -0.91 to 0.32; P = 0.34). Although the risk of pneumothorax was significantly higher in the NT group (RR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.14–2.68; P = 0.01), the reintervention rates were comparable between groups (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.48–2.25; P = 0.92). No significant difference was found in pleural effusion, subcutaneous emphysema, operation time, pain score on POD 7, and wound healing satisfactory (all P &gt; 0.05). The sensitivity analysis suggested that the results of the meta-analysis were stabilized.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggested that NT strategy is safe and feasible for selected patients scheduled for video-assisted thoracoscopic pulmonary resection.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-4-0026, identifier INPLASY202240026.

Comprehensive Review of Chest Tube Management: A Review

Importance

Thoracostomy, or chest tube placement, is used in a variety of clinical indications and can be lifesaving in certain circumstances. There have been developments and modifications to thoracostomy tubes, or chest tubes, over time, but they continue to be a staple in the thoracic surgeon's toolbox as well as adjacent specialties in medicine. This review will provide the nonexpert clinician a comprehensive understanding of the types of chest tubes, indications for their effective use, and key management details for ideal patient outcomes.

Observations

This review describes the types of chest tubes, indications for use, techniques for placement, common anatomical landmarks that are encountered with placement and management, and an overview of complications that may arise with tube thoracostomy. In addition, the future direction of chest tubes is explored, as well as the management of chest tubes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions and Relevance

Chest tube management is subjective, but the compilation of data can inform best practices and safe application to successfully manage the pleural space and ameliorate acquired pleural space disease.

Randomized controlled trial of an alternative drainage strategy vs routine chest tube insertion for postoperative pain after thoracoscopic wedge resection

Background

Thoracoscopic surgery has greatly alleviated the postoperative pain of patients, but postsurgical acute and chronic pain still exists and needs to be addressed. Indwelling drainage tubes are one of the leading causes of postoperative pain after thoracic surgery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the effects of alternative drainage on acute and chronic pain after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).

Methods

Ninety-two patients undergoing lung wedge resection were selected and randomly assigned to the conventional chest tube (CT) group and the 7-Fr central venous catheter (VC) group. Next, the numeric rating scale (NRS) and pain DETECT questionnaire were applied to evaluate the level and characteristics of postoperative pain.

Results

NRS scores of the VC group during hospitalization were significantly lower than those of the CT group 6 h after surgery, at postoperative day 1, at postoperative day 2, and at the moment of drainage tube removal. Moreover, the number of postoperative salvage analgesics (such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [(NSAIDs]) and postoperative hospitalization days were notably reduced in the VC group compared with the CT group. However, no significant difference was observed in terms of NRS pain scores between the two groups of patients during the follow-up for chronic pain at 3 months and 6 months.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a drainage strategy using a 7-Fr central VC can effectively relieve perioperative pain in selected patients undergoing VATS wedge resection, and this may promote the rapid recovery of such patients after surgery.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03230019. Registered July 23, 2017.

Safety and feasibility study of uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection without postoperative chest tube drainage: a retrospective propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of postoperative chest tube drainage (CTD) on safety and postoperative recovery by comparing patients with pulmonary nodule undergoing uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection with and without postoperative CTD.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data of patients who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection for pulmonary nodule at our hospital between 2018 and 2022. In cases where a 12-Fr chest tube was used following the procedure, the tube was not usually removed until the day after surgery. Therefore, the eligible patients were categorized into the drainage tube or the no-drainage tube group according to the use of postoperative CTD. Propensity score matching at a ratio of 1:1 was performed using clinicopathologic and demographic variables. The highest postoperative pain score, postoperative complication rate, postoperative length of stay and hospitalization costs were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

A total of 275 eligible patients, including 150 and 125 patients in the drainage tube and no-drainage tube groups, respectively, were included in the study. After propensity score matching, there were 102 patients in each group. The postoperative complication rate during hospitalization and at 1 week and 1 month after discharge were not significantly different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05 for all). The highest postoperative pain score was significantly lower in the no-drainage tube group than in the drainage tube group [2.02 (standard deviation: 0.81) days vs 2.31 (standard deviation: 0.76) days, P = 0.008]. The postoperative length of stay was significantly shorter in the no-drainage tube group than in the drainage tube group {3.00 [interquartile ranges (IQRs): 2.00-4.00] days vs 2.00 (IQRs: 1.00-3.00) days, P < 0.001}. Similarly, the total hospitalization costs were significantly lower in the no-drainage tube group than in the drainage tube group [33283.74 (IQRs: 27098.61-46718.56) yuan vs 26598.67 (IQRs: 22965.14-29933.67) yuan, P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Omission of postoperative CTD was safe and feasible in patients with pulmonary nodule undergoing wedge resection. The no-postoperative-drainage policy can substantially shorten the length of hospital stay and reduce the postoperative pain and hospitalization costs without increasing the risk of postoperative complications.

Postoperative Air Leaks After Lung Surgery: Predictors, Intraoperative Techniques, and Postoperative Management

Postoperative air leak is one of the most common complications after pulmonary resection and contributes to postoperative pain, complications, and increased hospital length of stay. Several risk factors, including both patient and surgical characteristics, increase the frequency of air leaks. Appropriate intraoperative tissue handling is the most important surgical technique to reduce air leaks. Digital drainage systems have improved the management of postoperative air leak via objective data, portability, and ease of use in the outpatient setting. Several treatment strategies have been used to address prolonged air leak, including pleurodesis, blood patch, placement of endobronchial valves, and reoperative surgery.

Tubeless uniportal thoracoscopic wedge resection with modified air leak test and chest tube drainage

Background

To investigate whether tubeless uniportal thoracoscopic wedge resection with modified air leak test and chest tube drainage has better short-term outcomes than non-intubated approach with chest tube drainage.

Methods

Data were collected retrospectively from January 2017 and December 2019. Tubeless group included 55 patients with pulmonary nodules underwent tubeless uniportal thoracoscopic wedge resection, 211 patients underwent non-intubated uniportal thoracoscopic wedge resection with chest tube drainage were included in drainage group. Peri-operative outcomes between two groups were compared.

Results

After 1:1 matching, 110 patients remained for analysis, baseline demographic and clinical variables were comparable between the two groups. Mean incision size was 3 cm in both group. Mean operative time was 59.3 min in tubeless group and 52.8 min in drainage group. The detectable mean lowest SpO₂ and mean peak EtCO₂ during operation was acceptable in both groups. Conversion to intubated ventilation or thoracotomy was not required. No patient failed the air leak test and did not undergo a tubeless procedure. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.5 days in tubeless group and 2.5 days in drainage group. Residual pneumothorax or subcutaneous emphysema was not frequent and mild in tubeless group. Side effects were rare and mild, including cough and hemoptysis. No re-intervention or readmission occurred. The postoperative VAS score was significantly lower in tubeless group.

Conclusions

Tubeless uniportal thoracoscopic wedge resection with modified air leak test and chest tube drainage is feasible and safe for selected patients with peripheral pulmonary nodules, it might reduce post-operation pain and lead to faster recovery.

The Improved Mediastinal Drainage Strategy for the Enhanced Recovery System After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

The improved drainage strategy was the transperitoneal placement of a single mediastinal drainage tube after esophagectomy. This study aimed to explore its effect on the incidence of postoperative complications, pain scores, and hospital stay.

METHODS

Data from 108 patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those in group A were treated with transthoracic placement of mediastinal drain and those in group B were treated with transperitoneal placement. The incidence of postoperative complications, pain scores, and postoperative hospital stay were compared.

RESULTS

The maximum pain scores in group B were significantly lower than those in group A from the first to the fourth postoperative days (PODs): POD1, 3.9 ± 0.7 vs 2.3 ± 0.7; POD2, 3.5 ± 0.8 vs 2.1 ± 0.7; POD3, 3.3 ± 0.8 vs 1.7 ± 0.8; and POD4, 3.1 ± 0.7 vs 1.7 ± 0.8 (all P < .001). Compared with group A, there were fewer postoperative analgesic drug users in group B (44.6% vs 17.9%; P = .005), fewer cases of pleural effusion (10.7% vs 0%; P = .045), and fewer cases of closed thoracic drainage due to pleural effusion or pneumothorax (14.3% vs 0%; P = .014). There were no significant differences in the incidence of anastomotic leakage, mediastinitis, major pulmonary complications, major abdominal complications, surgical site infection, and total postoperative complications, without statistical differences in postoperative hospital stay and 30-d mortality (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The transperitoneal placement of a single mediastinal drain can reduce postoperative pain and the incidence of pleural effusion, without increasing the incidence of other major postoperative complications and postoperative hospital stay.

Single versus double chest drains after pulmonary lobectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Previous randomized controlled trials have compared the efficacy and safety of single chest drain (SCD) and double chest drains (DCD) in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy, yet the results remain inconsistent. Therefore, we aimed to conduct this present systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of SCD and DCD in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy.

Methods

PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Weipu, and China Biomedical Literature databases were searched up to February 28, 2020, to identify the potential RCTs on SCD and DCD in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy. The main outcomes including verbal pain score, the duration of drainage (days), the length of hospital stay (days), and the incidence of air leak and re-drainage were collected and analyzed. All the data were processed and analyzed with software RevMan 5.3. We calculated and analyzed the odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes.

Results

A total of 11 RCTs with 1214 patients were included, in which 589 patients received SCD treatment and 625 patients DCD treatment. The verbal pain score (MD = − 0.54, 95%CI (− 0.87, − 0.21)), the duration of drainage (MD = − 0.65, 95%CI (− 1.04, − 0.26)), and the length of hospital stay (MD = − 0.55, 95%CI (− 0.80, − 0.29)) in SCD group were significantly less than that of DCD group. There were no significant differences on the incidence of air leak (OR = 1.35, 95%CI (0.86, 2.11)) and re-drainage (OR = 0.88, 95%CI (0.41, 1.90)) among the two groups.

Conclusions

SCD is a safe option, and it has the advantages of less postoperative pain, shortened duration of drain, and reduced length of hospital stay when compared with DCD in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy.