单布莱克引流的数字引流系统肺切除术后的最佳吸引策略:一项随机研究。

IF 1.6 Q2 SURGERY
Conor M Maxwell, Benny Weksler, Kevin Shahbahrami, Brent Williams, Kurt DeHaven, Pam Kuchta, Kara Specht, Hiran C Fernando
{"title":"单布莱克引流的数字引流系统肺切除术后的最佳吸引策略:一项随机研究。","authors":"Conor M Maxwell, Benny Weksler, Kevin Shahbahrami, Brent Williams, Kurt DeHaven, Pam Kuchta, Kara Specht, Hiran C Fernando","doi":"10.1177/15569845251342253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Chest tube management after pulmonary resection is not standardized. Surgeons vary regarding the use of suction versus water seal, single versus multiple drains, drain type, and drainage threshold before removal. A randomized study was undertaken comparing standard suction (SS) of -20 cmH<sub>2</sub>O to low suction (LS) of -8 cmH<sub>2</sub>O using digital drainage systems. The primary aim was to demonstrate a shorter duration of air leak with LS. Secondary aims included chest tube duration, length of stay between arms, and the effectiveness of using a single 24 Fr Blake (channel) drain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients scheduled for minimally invasive lung resection were eligible. The threshold for tube removal was a drainage volume of ≤450 mL/24 h and air leak of ≤20 mL/min over 6 h.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 148 patients were eligible (76 SS and 72 LS). There were no differences in baseline characteristics. The duration of air leak (0.9 vs 1.2 days), chest tube duration (2.1 vs 2.1 days), hospital stay (2 vs 2 days), and prolonged air leak incidence (8% vs 11%) were not significantly different. In LS patients, there were more pleural interventions required (11% vs 3%, <i>P</i> = 0.05) and a trend for more subcutaneous emphysema (14% vs 4%) on chest x-ray before chest tube removal.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The routine use of a 24 Fr Blake drain and a drainage threshold of 450 cc/24 h for chest tube removal was safe and effective. We found no advantage of LS. However, more pleural interventions were required and a trend for increased subcutaneous emphysema with LS was found, suggesting SS may be preferred when an air leak is present.</p>","PeriodicalId":13574,"journal":{"name":"Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"367-374"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal Suction Strategy After Pulmonary Resection Using a Digital Drainage System With a Single Blake Drain: A Randomized Study.\",\"authors\":\"Conor M Maxwell, Benny Weksler, Kevin Shahbahrami, Brent Williams, Kurt DeHaven, Pam Kuchta, Kara Specht, Hiran C Fernando\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15569845251342253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Chest tube management after pulmonary resection is not standardized. Surgeons vary regarding the use of suction versus water seal, single versus multiple drains, drain type, and drainage threshold before removal. A randomized study was undertaken comparing standard suction (SS) of -20 cmH<sub>2</sub>O to low suction (LS) of -8 cmH<sub>2</sub>O using digital drainage systems. The primary aim was to demonstrate a shorter duration of air leak with LS. Secondary aims included chest tube duration, length of stay between arms, and the effectiveness of using a single 24 Fr Blake (channel) drain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients scheduled for minimally invasive lung resection were eligible. The threshold for tube removal was a drainage volume of ≤450 mL/24 h and air leak of ≤20 mL/min over 6 h.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 148 patients were eligible (76 SS and 72 LS). There were no differences in baseline characteristics. The duration of air leak (0.9 vs 1.2 days), chest tube duration (2.1 vs 2.1 days), hospital stay (2 vs 2 days), and prolonged air leak incidence (8% vs 11%) were not significantly different. In LS patients, there were more pleural interventions required (11% vs 3%, <i>P</i> = 0.05) and a trend for more subcutaneous emphysema (14% vs 4%) on chest x-ray before chest tube removal.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The routine use of a 24 Fr Blake drain and a drainage threshold of 450 cc/24 h for chest tube removal was safe and effective. We found no advantage of LS. However, more pleural interventions were required and a trend for increased subcutaneous emphysema with LS was found, suggesting SS may be preferred when an air leak is present.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13574,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"367-374\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15569845251342253\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15569845251342253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:肺切除术后胸管管理不规范。外科医生在使用抽吸还是水封、单管还是多管引流、引流类型和取出前的引流阈值等方面存在差异。采用数字引流系统进行了一项随机研究,比较-20 cmH2O的标准吸力(SS)和-8 cmH2O的低吸力(LS)。主要目的是证明LS的空气泄漏持续时间较短。次要目标包括胸管持续时间,臂间停留时间,以及使用单一24 Fr Blake(通道)引流的有效性。方法:选择行微创肺切除术的患者。拔管阈值为引流量≤450ml / 24h, 6 h内漏气≤20ml /min。结果:共纳入148例患者(SS 76例,LS 72例)。基线特征没有差异。漏气时间(0.9天vs 1.2天)、胸管时间(2.1天vs 2.1天)、住院时间(2天vs 2天)、漏气时间延长发生率(8% vs 11%)差异无统计学意义。在LS患者中,需要更多的胸膜干预(11%对3%,P = 0.05),并且在胸管取出前胸片显示更多的皮下肺气肿(14%对4%)。结论:常规使用24fr Blake引流管,引流阈值450cc / 24h进行胸管拔除安全有效。我们没有发现LS的优势。然而,需要更多的胸膜干预,并且发现LS患者皮下肺气肿增加的趋势,这表明当存在空气泄漏时,SS可能更可取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimal Suction Strategy After Pulmonary Resection Using a Digital Drainage System With a Single Blake Drain: A Randomized Study.

Objective: Chest tube management after pulmonary resection is not standardized. Surgeons vary regarding the use of suction versus water seal, single versus multiple drains, drain type, and drainage threshold before removal. A randomized study was undertaken comparing standard suction (SS) of -20 cmH2O to low suction (LS) of -8 cmH2O using digital drainage systems. The primary aim was to demonstrate a shorter duration of air leak with LS. Secondary aims included chest tube duration, length of stay between arms, and the effectiveness of using a single 24 Fr Blake (channel) drain.

Methods: Patients scheduled for minimally invasive lung resection were eligible. The threshold for tube removal was a drainage volume of ≤450 mL/24 h and air leak of ≤20 mL/min over 6 h.

Results: A total of 148 patients were eligible (76 SS and 72 LS). There were no differences in baseline characteristics. The duration of air leak (0.9 vs 1.2 days), chest tube duration (2.1 vs 2.1 days), hospital stay (2 vs 2 days), and prolonged air leak incidence (8% vs 11%) were not significantly different. In LS patients, there were more pleural interventions required (11% vs 3%, P = 0.05) and a trend for more subcutaneous emphysema (14% vs 4%) on chest x-ray before chest tube removal.

Conclusions: The routine use of a 24 Fr Blake drain and a drainage threshold of 450 cc/24 h for chest tube removal was safe and effective. We found no advantage of LS. However, more pleural interventions were required and a trend for increased subcutaneous emphysema with LS was found, suggesting SS may be preferred when an air leak is present.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery is the first journal whose main mission is to disseminate information specifically about advances in technology and techniques that lead to less invasive treatment of cardiothoracic and vascular disease. It delivers cutting edge original research, reviews, essays, case reports, and editorials from the pioneers and experts in the field of minimally invasive cardiothoracic and vascular disease, including biomedical engineers. Also included are papers presented at the annual ISMICS meeting. Official Journal of the International Society for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信