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.
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 analyze the effect of different drainage modes on the postoperative thoracic drainage after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for radical resection of lower lung carcinoma.MethodsA total of 183 patients with non-small cell lung cancer who received biportal thoracoscopic anatomical lower lobectomy combined with mediastinal lymph node dissection in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from August 2017 to August 2019 were enrolled, including 113 males and 70 females, aged 31-77 (56.5±6.4) years. The patients were randomly divided into three groups, including an anterior axillary line group, a mid-axillary line group and a modified anterior axillary line group. Clinical efficacy of the three groups was compared.ResultsNo significant difference among these three groups in terms of gender, age, surgical site, pathological type, pathological staging, postoperative chest wall subcutaneous emphysema, postoperative pain score, and postoperative hospital stay was found (P>0.05). There were significant differences among the patients in terms of postoperative pleural effusion, re-insertion of chest tube or aspiration, total liquid quantity of thoracic drainage, drainage time and chest wall incision stitches time (P<0.05). The anterior axillary line group had higher risk of postoperative pleural effusion than the other groups (P<0.05). The occurrence of postoperative pleural effusion and rate of reposition of chest tube or aspiration were significantly reduced in the modified anterior axillary line group (P<0.05).ConclusionChest drainage tube with large diameter (24F) in the 5th intercostal space of the anterior axillary line combined with another micro-tube (8.5F) in the 7th or 8th intercostal space of the inferior scapular angle line can shorten drainage time to reduce postoperative pain, reduce the occurrence of postoperative pleural effusion, and shorten the time of surgical incision stitches.
ObjectiveTo discuss the safety and feasibility of no chest tube (NCT) after thoracoscopic pneumonectomy.MethodsThe online databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Database, VIP, China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc) were searched by computer from inception to October 2020 to collect the research on NCT after thoracoscopic pneumonectomy. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of the included studies. The RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 17 studies were included. There were 12 cohort studies and 5 randomized controlled trials including 1 572 patients with 779 patients in the NCT group and 793 patients in the chest tube placement (CTP) group. Meta–analysis results showed that the length of postoperative hospital stay in the NCT group was shorter than that in the CTP group (SMD=–1.23, 95%CI –1.59 to –0.87, P<0.000 01). Patients in the NCT group experienced slighter pain than those in the CTP group at postoperative day (POD)1 (SMD=–0.97, 95%CI –1.42 to –0.53, P<0.000 1), and POD2 (SMD=–1.10, 95%CI –2.00 to –0.20, P=0.02), while no statistical difference was found between the two groups in the visual analogue scale of POD3 (SMD=–0.92, 95%CI –1.91 to 0.07, P=0.07). There was no statistical difference in the 30-day complication rate (RR=0.93, 95%CI 0.61 to 1.44, P=0.76), the rate of postoperative chest drainage (RR=1.51, 95%CI 0.68 to 3.37, P=0.31) or the rate of thoracocentesis (RR=2.81, 95%CI 0.91 to 8.64, P=0.07) between the two groups. No death occurred in the perioperative period in both groups.ConclusionIt is feasible and safe to omit the chest tube after thoracoscopic pneumonectomy for patients who meet the criteria.
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 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.