ObjectiveTo compare clinical results between single and double chest tube applications after lung cancer resection, and explore the role of single chest tube in postoperative fast track recovery. MethodNinety-three patients with lung cancer who underwent lobectomy between March and December of 2009 in West China Hospital of Sichuan University were included in this study. All the patients were divided into a single-tube group including 46 patients (39 males and 7 females) with their age of 58.4±9.5 years, and a double-tube group including 47 patients (32 males and 15 females) with their age of 58.2±9.0 years. Drainage amount, duration, postoperative hospital stay, and incidences of pneumothorax and pleural effusion after removal of chest tubes were compared between the 2 groups. ResultsThe percentage of patients undergoing complete video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) of the double-tube group was significantly higher than that of the single-tube group, and the percentage of patients undergoing thoracotomy of the double-tube group was significantly lower than that of the single-tube group (P < 0.05). Drainage amount of the double-tube group was significantly larger than that of the single-tube group (824.4±612.5 ml vs. 510.7±406.7 ml, P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in drainage duration, postoperative hospital stay, the incidences of subcutaneous emphysema, pneumothorax, pleural effusion or re-insertion of chest drain between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). ConclusionClinical results of single chest tube is better than or equivalent to those of double chest tubes after lung cancer resection, and drainage duration of single chest tube application might be shorter.
Objective To examine the application effectiveness of dual 8F ultrafine pigtail drainage tubes versus a single 28F large-bore chest tube in single-port thoracoscopic lobectomy/segmentectomy. Methods Clinical data of patients who underwent single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy/segmentectomy within our medical group from January 2020 to August 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. They were categorized into two groups based on postoperative drainage methods: a dual 8F ultrafine pigtail tubes group and a single 28F large-bore chest tube group. Comparative analysis was performed on perioperative data for the two groups of patients. Results The dual 8F ultrafine pigtail tubes group comprised of 68 patients, with 41 females and 27 males, and an average age of (54.72±13.34) years, while the single 28F large-bore chest tube group comprised of 80 patients, with 40 females and 40 males, and an average age of (57.60±11.04) years. There were statistical differences between the two groups in terms of postoperative drainage volume on day 1, day 2, and day 3, total postoperative drainage volume, postoperative tube placement time, postoperative pain score at 48 hours, maximum postoperative pain score, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications related to drainage tubes, and emergency use of pain-relieving medication after surgery (P＜0.05). Conclusion After single-port thoracoscopic lobectomy/segmentectomy, the application of dual ultrafine 8F pigtail drainage tubes can lead to a reduction in postoperative drainage volume and shorten the duration of postoperative drainage tube placement and hospital stay, thereby decreasing postoperative pain and the frequency of emergency pain-relieving medication. Moreover, it lowers the incidence of drainage tube-related complications. In alignment with current enhanced recovery after surgery principles, this approach is advantageous for postoperative recovery.
Objective To explore the effect of 16F gastric tube on pain relief in postoperative lung cancer patients. Methods A total of 118 lung cancer patients were treated with radical resection of lung cancer in our hospital between January 2015 and May 2016. The patients were assigned into two groups: a 16F gastric tube group (16F group, 60 patients, 30 males and 30 females at age of 41-73 (52.13±7.83) years and a 28F drainage tube group (28F group, 58 patients, 25 males and 33 females at age of 45-75 (55.62±4.27) years. Clinical effects were compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistical difference in drainage time (4.47±1.03 dvs. 4.24±1.16 d, P=0.473), drainage amount (560.37±125.00 mlvs. 656.03±132.45 ml, P=0.478), incidences of pneumothorax (5/60 vs. 2/58, P=0.439), pleural effusion (6/60 vs. 3/58, P=0.522), and subcutaneous emphysema (3/60 vs. 1/58, P=0.635) between the two groups (P>0.05). The pain caused by the drainage tube in the16F group was less than that in the 28F drainage tube group with a statistical difference (F=4 242.996, P<0.001). The frequency of taking analgesics in the 16F group was significantly less than that in the 28F group (12/60vs. 26/58, P<0.001). Conclusion The effects of draining pleural effusions and promoting lung recruitment are similar between the 16F group and the 28F group. However, the wound pain caused by 16F gastric tube is significantly less than that by 28F drainage tube.
Objective To evaluate the effect of mediastinal drainage tube placed in the left thoracic cavity after partial resection of the mediastinum pleura in robot-assisted McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma, and to compare it with the traditional method of mediastinal drainage tube placed in mediastinum. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 96 patients who underwent robot-assisted McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma by the surgeons in the same medical group in our department between July 2018 and March 2021. There were 78 males and 18 females, aged 52-79 years. Left mediastinum pleura around the carcinoma during operation was resected in all patients. Patients were divided into two groups according to the method of mediastinal drainage tube placement: a control group (placed in mediastinum) and an observation group (placed through the mediastinal pleura into the left thoracic cavity with several side ports distributed in the mediastinum). The incidence of left thoracentesis or catheterization after surgery, anastomotic fistula and anastomotic healing time, other complications such as pneumonia and postoperative pain score were also compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistical difference in baseline data or surgical parameters between the two groups. The percentage of patients in the observation group who needed re-thoracentesis or re-catheterization postoperatively due to massive pleural effusion in the left thoracic cavity was significantly lower than that in the control group (5.6% vs. 21.4%, P=0.020). The incidence of anastomotic leakage (3.7% vs. 7.1%, P=0.651) and the healing time of anastomosis (18.56±4.27 d vs. 24.33±5.48 d, P=0.304) were not statistically different between the two groups, and there was no statistical difference in other complications such as pulmonary infection. Moreover, the postoperative pain score was also similar between the two groups. Conclusion For patients whose mediastinal pleura is removed partially during robot-assisted McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma, placing the drainage tube through the mediastinal pleura into the left thoracic cavity can reduce the risk of left-side thoracentesis or catheterization, which may promote the postoperative recovery of patients.
ObjectiveTo explore the effect of mediastinal drainage tube placed after the esophageal cancer resection with intrathoracic anastomosis on postoperative complications such as anastomotic fistula. MethodsLiterature on the application of mediastinal drainage tubes in esophageal cancer surgery published in databases such as PubMed, EMbase, CNKI, China Biomedical Literature Database, VIP, and Wanfang were searched using English or Chinese, from the establishment of the databases to December 31, 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of the included retrospective studies, the Cochrane Handbook bias risk tool was used to assess the bias risk of randomized controlled trials (RCT), and Review Manager 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. ResultsA total of 19 retrospective studies and 8 RCT involving 6320 patients were included, with 3257 patients in the observation group (mediastinal drainage tube+closed thoracic drainage tube) and 3063 patients in the control group (closed thoracic drainage tube or single mediastinal drainage tube). The NOS score of the included literature was≥6 points, and one RCT had a low risk of bias and the other RCT had a moderate risk of bias . Meta-analysis results showed that compared with the control group, the observation group had fewer postoperative lung complications [OR=0.44, 95%CI (0.36, 0.53), P<0.001], fewer postoperative cardiac complications [OR=0.40, 95%CI (0.33, 0.49), P<0.001], earlier average diagnosis time of anastomotic fistula [MD=−3.33, 95%CI (−3.95, −2.71), P<0.001], lower inflammation indicators [body temperature: MD=−1.15, 95%CI (−1.36, −0.93), P<0.001; white cell count: MD=−5.62, 95%CI (−7.29, −3.96), P<0.001], and shorter postoperative hospital stay [MD=−15.13, 95%CI (−18.69, −11.56), P<0.001]. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of postoperative anastomotic fistula between the two groups [OR=0.85, 95%CI (0.70, 1.05), P=0.13]. ConclusionPlacing a mediastinal drainage tube cannot reduce the incidence of anastomotic fistula, but it can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative respiratory and circulatory system complications in patients and improve patients’ prognosis. It can early detect teh anastomotic fistula and fully drain digestive fluid to promote rapid healing of the fistula, alleviate the infection symptoms of postoperative anastomotic fistula, and shorten the hospital stay.
Chest tube is routinely used after thoracoscopic lung cancer surgery for evacuating air and fluids. Development of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) makes the disadvantages of traditional drainage clearly. In this review, we summarized the advantages and disadvantages of small-bore chest tube, the use of digital drainage system, the time of removing the chest tube, the indications of non chest tube, the improvements of drainage tube hole suture and the complications of chest tube placement after thoracoscopic lung cancer surgery.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical application effects of using no drainage tube in mediastinal tumor resection via thoracoscopic subxiphoid approach. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of patients who underwent mediastinal tumor resection via thoracoscopic subxiphoid approach at the Fourth People's Hospital of Zigong City from January 2020 to February 2024. Patients were divided into a non-drainage tube group and a drainage tube group, and their perioperative data were compared. ResultsA total of 149 patients were included, and there were 111 patients of thymoma, 5 patients of teratoma, and 33 patients of cyst. There were 77 patients in the non-drainage tube group, including 40 males and 37 females, aged 28-79 (53.72±13.34) years; there were 72 patients in the drainage tube group, including 33 males and 39 females, aged 26-80 (55.60±11.06) years. The differences in postoperative pain score at 48 hours, maximum postoperative pain score, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative drainage tube-related complications, and the number of temporary analgesics used after surgery between the two groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). ConclusionThe use of non-drainage tube technology in mediastinal tumor resection through thoracoscopic subxiphoid approach can reduce postoperative pain and the number of temporary analgesics used, as well as decrease the incidence of drainage tube-related complications.