Multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing digital and traditional chest drain in a VATS pulmonary lobectomy cohort: interim analysis

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Expert Consensus Document on the Management of Pleural Drains After Pulmonary Lobectomy: Expert Consensus Document

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Workforce on Evidence-Based Surgery provides this document on management of pleural drains after pulmonary lobectomy. The goal of this consensus document is to provide guidance regarding pleural drains in 5 specific areas: (1) choice of drain, including size, type, and number; (2) management, including use of suction vs water seal and criteria for removal; (3) imaging recommendations, including the use of daily and postpull chest roentgenograms; (4) use of digital drainage systems; and (5) management of prolonged air leak. To formulate the consensus statements, a task force of 15 general thoracic surgeons was invited to review the existing literature on this topic. Consensus was obtained using a modified Delphi method consisting of 2 rounds of voting until 75% agreement on the statements was reached. A total of 13 consensus statements are provided to encourage standardization and stimulate additional research in this important area.

Clinical outcomes and staff satisfaction after adoption of digital chest drainage system for minimally invasive lung resections

Background

Digital chest drainage systems (DCDS) provide reliable pleural drainage while quantifying fluid output and air leak. However, the benefits of DCDS in the contemporary era of minimally invasive thoracic surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have not been fully investigated. Additionally, hospital and resident staff experiences after implementation of a DCDS have not been fully explored. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and hospital staff experience after adoption of a DCDS for minimally invasive lung resections.

Methods

A single-center retrospective review of patients who underwent minimally invasive lung resection (lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection) and received a DCDS from 11/1/2021 to 11/1/2022. DCDS patients were compared to sequential historical controls (3/1/2019-6/30/2021) who received a analog chest drainage system. For the analog system, chest tubes were removed when no bubbles were observed in the water seal compartment with Valsalva, cough, and in variable positions. With a DCDS, chest tubes were removed when the air leak was less than 30 cc/min for 8 hours, with no spikes. All patients followed an institutional ERAS protocol. Primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and chest tube duration. Hospital staff and residents were surveyed regarding their experience.

Results

One hundred and twenty-four patients received DCDS, and 248 received an analog chest drainage system. There was a reduction in mean LOS (3.6 vs. 4.4 days, P=0.01) and chest tube duration (2.7 vs. 3.6 days, P=0.03) in the DCDS group. Hospital staff (n=77, 46% response rate) reported the DCDS easier to use (60%, P<0.001) and easier to care for patients with (65%, P<0.001) compared to the analog system. Surgical residents (n=28, 56% response rate) reported increased confidence in interpretation of air leak (75%, P<0.001) and decision-making surrounding chest tube removal (79%, P<0.001).

Conclusions

Using a DCDS can reduce LOS and chest tube duration in the contemporary setting of minimally invasive lung resections and ERAS protocols. Increased confidence of resident decision-making for chest tube removal may contribute to improved outcomes.

Benefits of using digital thoracic drainage systems for post-operative treatment in pediatric populations: personal experience and review of literature

Introduction

The digital chest drainage monitoring system (Medela Thopaz+), unlike analogical systems, reliably regulates the pressure applied to the patient's chest and digitally and silently monitors critical therapeutic indicators (volume of fluid and/or drained air). Its use in adulthood has been widely described, but there is still little experience in the pediatric field. The aim of this study is to test this new device in the pediatric population.

Materials and methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 160 patients undergoing chest surgery at our Hospital. These patients were divided into 82 treated with the Thopaz system in the period from January 2021 to April 2023 and 78 in whom Pleurevac, had been used in the time period from January 2020 to April 2023.

Results

The average age of patients was 10.45 years (range: 3.1-17.2) for the Thopaz Group and 10.71 years for Pleurevac Group. The groups were homogeneus also by weight and type of intervention. The device was held in place for 10.64 days (mean) for Thopaz Group, compared to 16.87 days (mean) for Pleurevac Group (p < 0.05). The median number of postoperative x-rays before the closure of the chest tube was 4.29 in the digital drainage group compared to 8.41 in the traditional draining group (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The digital chest monitoring device provides objective measurement, allows for rapid patient mobilization (with good pain control and increased compliance). In addition, the use of Thopaz in the paediatric population seems to be safe (there is no statistically significant difference in terms of complications such as prolonged air leaks and pneumothorax after the chest tube closure) and potentially beneficial.

Intraoperative prevention and conservative management of postoperative prolonged air leak after lung resection: a systematic review

Background

Prolonged air leak (PAL) due to an alveolar-pleural fistula (APF) is the most common complication after lung surgery. PAL is associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality, a longer chest tube duration, hence a prolonged hospitalization. Management of PAL may be challenging, and the thoracic surgeon should be aware of the possible therapeutic strategies.

Methods

A systematic literature review was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Ovid and Google Scholar. Title, abstract and full-text screening was performed, followed by structured data extraction, methodological quality assessment and Cochrane risk of bias assessment. Inclusion criteria were: case-control studies/randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the new tested method with the standard of care to manage PAL after lung surgery; PAL due to APF; at least 10 patients; English-written papers.

Results

A total of 942 initial papers from literature search, resulted in 43 papers after the selection. This systematic review found that the use of intraoperative measures as surgical sealants or pleural tenting, as well as a proper management of the chest drain and the use of blood patch or sclerosant agents seem to reduce postoperative air leaks incidence and/or duration and length of chest drain stay and hospitalization.

Conclusions

Different measures have been described in literature to manage or prevent postoperative PAL. Most of them seem to be safe and efficient if compared to the "wait and see" strategy, even if large comparative studies that standardize the intra- and post-operative management of APF after lung resection are lacking and, actually, hard to conceptualize. However, there is a large consensus on the value of a preoperative PAL-risk stratification and on the necessity of tailoring PAL management or prevention's strategy and its timing on each patient's features.

Advantages of applying digital chest drainage system for postoperative management of patients following pulmonary resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the value of the chest digital drainage system for the postoperative management of patients who have undergone pulmonary resection.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of digital drainage systems versus the analog drainage system for patients with lung disease after pulmonary resection. Dichotomous variables were evaluated using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and mean and standardized mean differences (MDs and SMDs, respectively) with 95% CIs were used to calculate continuous variables. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata and RevMan software.

RESULTS

In total, 12 RCTs involving 2000 patients were analyzed. Significant differences in duration of chest tube placement (SMD =  -0.49; 95% CI =  -0.78 to -0.20), length of hospital stay (MD =-0.79 days; 95% CI = -1.24 to -0.34), and number of chest tube clamping tests (RR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36-1.49) were observed between the two groups, which did not significant differ in the occurrence of prolonged air leak or cardiopulmonary complication rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The digital chest drainage system is mainly advantageous in the duration of chest tube placement, length of hospital stay, and number of chest tube clamping tests. Future research should evaluate the requirements and economic impact of using digital system in routine clinical practice.