目的 探讨可调压胸腔闭式引流瓶持续负压吸引治疗自发性气胸持续漏气的疗效观察及护理。 方法 将2008年3月－2012年10月收治的自发性气胸行胸腔闭式引流术后接传统闭式引流瓶，引流达3 d胸腔仍有漏气患者55例分为A组（治疗组）、B组（对比组）。Ａ组30例更换为可调压胸腔闭式引流瓶、Ｂ组25例继续使用传统闭式引流瓶。 结果 Ａ组患者平均带管时间缩短，管腔堵塞、引流液逆流、低蛋白血症等并发症发生比Ｂ组减少。 结论 可调压胸腔闭式引流瓶持续胸腔负压吸引治疗自发性气胸持续漏气患者治疗效果优于传统闭式引流好，患者带管时间及平均住院时间缩短，住院费用降低，安全性高，并发症少。
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical feasibility and safety of uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) without chest tube in enhanced recovery thoracic surgery.MethodThe clinical data of patients with pulmonary bulla, pulmonary nodules and mediastinal tumors who underwent uniportal VATS in Department of Thoracic Surgery in the Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University between January 2015 to May 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 78 patients did not receive closed thoracic drainage tube (a tube-free group), including 30 males and 48 females aged 32.5±8.3 years, 92 patients closed thoracic drainage tube after operation (a control group), including 38 males and 54 females aged 31.4±13.6 years. The surgery-related indicators, postoperative complications and visual analogue score (VAS) were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe time of early ambulation and hospital stay after operation in the tube-free group (1.0±0.3 d, 3.3±0.7 d) were significantly shorter than those in the control group (1.8±0.6 d, 5.2±0.8 d) (P=0.000, P=0.000). The VAS pain scores on the first, second and third day after operation in the tube-free group (4.5±1.8, 3.6±2.4, 2.5±1.4) were also significantly lower than those in the control group (6.8±2.2, 5.7±2.9, 3.9±1.2) (P=0.000, P=0.000, P=0.000). Operation time and intraoperative blood loss in the tube-free group (55.3±12.2 min, 21.5±5.1 mL) and the control group (57.1±6.5 min, 22.2±3.5 mL) were not statistically different (P=0.220, P=0.146). There was no pulmonary infection in both groups, and the wound healing rate was 100.0%. There was no significant difference in pneumothorax, pleural effusion, arrhythmia and re-insertion of chest drain between the tube-free group (5 patients, 8 patients, 1 patient, 3 patients) and the control group (1 patient, 4 patients, 2 patients, 1 patient, P=0.145, P=0.134, P=0.885, P=0.499).ConclusionIn strictly screened patients undergoing uniportal thoracoscopic surgery, no thoracic closed drainage tube can relieve postoperative pain, promote early ambulation activities and enhanced recovery of patients.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of central venous catheter closed drainage of pleural cavity combined with negative pressure suction in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. MethodsThe randomized controlled trials(RCTs) on central venous catheter closed drainage of pleural cavity combined with negative pressure suction in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax were searched in PubMed, OVID, CNKI, Wangfang database, Super Star Digital Library, CMB, Baidu and Google search engines. The searching time was from the time of building database to September 15, 2014. Two searchers selected studies based on the included criteria strictly. The quality of RCTs was appraised by the criteria of Cochrane Collaboration. RevMan5.3 software was used for data analysis and management. ResultsA total of 18 RCTs including 1 549 patients were identified. There were no statistical differences in time of lung recruitment (SMD=0.01 and 95%CI -0.23 to 0.25, P=0.95), time of hospital stay (SMD=-0.42, 95%CI -1.81 to 0.97, P=0.55), curative resection rate (RR=1.04 and 95%CI 1.00 to 1.08, P=0.07) between the two groups. The rate of complications in the central venous catheter group was less than that in the conventional pleural cavity closed drainage group with a statistical difference (RR=0.31, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.43, P<0.000 01). ConclusionThe treatment of central venous catheter closed drainage of pleural cavity combined with negative pressure suction for spontaneous pneumothorax is a simple and safe operation. However, the quality of studies included is not high and some sample size is small. RCTs with large sample of high quality are still needed for further confirmation.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of closed thoracic drainage with single tube or double tubes after video-assisted thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery.MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed on 50 patients (39 males, 11 females) who underwent three-port thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery in our hospital from January 2013 to March 2019. Twenty-five patients with single indwelling tube after surgery were divided into the observation group and 25 patients with double indwelling tubes were divided into the control group.ResultsThere was no significant difference in pulmonary retension on day 3 after surgery, postoperative complications, the patency rate of drainage tube before extubation, retention time or postoperative hospital stay (P>0.05). Postoperative pain and total amount of nonsteroidal analgesics use in the observation group was less than those in the control group (P<0.05). ConclusionIt is safe and effective to perform closed thoracic drainage with single indwelling tube after video-assisted thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery, which can significantly reduce the incidence of related adverse drug reactions and facilitate rapid postoperative rehabilitation with a reduction of postoperative pain and the use of analgesic drugs.
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.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effect of single mediastinal drainage tube and both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube for the patients who received thoracoscopic radical resection of esophageal carcinoma.MethodsWe enrolled 96 esophageal carcinoma patients who received thoracoscopic radical resection from June 2016 to October 2018. Of them, 49 patients were indwelt with both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube (a chest & mediastinal drainage group, a CMD group) while the other 47 patients were indwelt with single mediastinal drainage tube (a single mediastinal drainage group, a SMD group). The total drainage volume, intubation time and incidence of postoperative complications (postoperative atelectasis, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion and anastomotic leakage) between the two groups were compared. The pain score and comfort score were also compared between the two groups.ResultsThe total drainage volume and intubation time in the SMD group were not significantly different from those in the CMD group (1 321±421 mL vs. 1 204±545 mL, P=0.541; 6.1±3.7 d vs. 6.4 ±5.1 d, P=0.321). The incidence of postoperative complications (postoperative atelectasis, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion and anastomotic leakage) in the SMD group was not significantly different from that in the CMD group (10.6% vs. 6.1%, P=0.712; 4.3% vs. 10.2%, P=0.656; 6.4% vs. 12.2%, P=0.121; 2.1% vs. 4.1%, P=0.526). The numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores on the first to the fifth day after surgery and during extubation in the SMD group were significantly lower than those in the CMD group (3.2±2.1 vs. 5.1±2.4, P=0.041; 2.8±0.6 vs. 4.8±1.4, P=0.015; 2.1±0.4 vs. 4.5±0.4, P=0.019; 1.7±0.7 vs. 4.0±0.8, P=0.004; 1.8±0.7 vs. 3.2±1.2, P=0.006; 1.4±0.2 vs. 2.5±3.4, P=0.012). The VAS comfort scores in the SMD group were significantly lower than those in the CMD group (3.6±1.7 vs. 6.6±3.7, P=0.018; 2.9±2.0 vs. 5.1±3.4, P=0.007; 2.1±1.4 vs. 5.5±2.4, P=0.004; 3.0±0.9 vs. 4.6±3.8, P=0.012; 1.8±1.1 vs. 4.2±2.7, P=0.003; 2.4±3.2 vs. 5.3±1.7, P=0.020).ConclusionThe clinical effect of single mediastinal drainage tube in thoracoscopic resection of esophageal carcinoma is similar to that of both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube, but it can significantly improve the comfort of the patients.
Objective To compare the efficacy of the single tube (ST) and double tube (DT) for closed thoracic drainage after lobectomy. Methods The PubMed, Medline, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP database and CBMdisc from inception to March 30, 2018 were searched by computer to identify randomized controlled trial (RCT) about ST and DT drainage after lobectomy. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria the literature was screened. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results Twelve RCTs were enrolled in this meta-analysis, including 1 442 patients. Compared with the patients using DT after lobectomy, the patients using ST had significantly less postoperative pain (MD=–0.64, 95%CI –0.71 to –0.56, P<0.000 01) and shorter duration of drainage (MD=–0.62, 95%CI –0.78 to –0.46, P<0.000 01) and hospital stay (MD=–0.55, 95%CI –0.80 to –0.29, P<0.000 1). Besides, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications (RR=1.11, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.49, P=0.49), air leaks (RD=0.03, 95%CI –0.02 to 0.08, P=0.19) and the redrainage rate (RR=0.89, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.54, P=0.67). ConclusionST drainage after lobectomy is effective, which reduces postoperative pain and duration of hospital stay and drainage, and moreover, does not increase the postoperative complications and redrainage rate.