Albert H Olivencia-Yurvati, Brandon H Cherry, Hunaid A Gurji, Daniel W White, J Tyler Newton, Gary F Scott, Besim Hoxha, Terence Gourlay, Robert T Mallet
{"title":"新型开胸管改善术后胸腔引流。","authors":"Albert H Olivencia-Yurvati, Brandon H Cherry, Hunaid A Gurji, Daniel W White, J Tyler Newton, Gary F Scott, Besim Hoxha, Terence Gourlay, Robert T Mallet","doi":"10.4172/2155-9880.1000321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Conventional, separate mediastinal and pleural tubes are often inefficient at draining thoracic effusions.</p><p><strong>Description: </strong>We developed a Y-shaped chest tube with split ends that divide within the thoracic cavity, permitting separate intrathoracic placement and requiring a single exit port. In this study, thoracic drainage by the split drain vs. that of separate drains was tested.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After sternotomy, pericardiotomy, and left pleurotomy, pigs were fitted with separate chest drains (n=10) or a split tube prototype (n=9) with internal openings positioned in the mediastinum and in the costo-diaphragmatic recess. Separate series of experiments were conducted to test drainage of D5W or 0.58 M sucrose, an aqueous solution with viscosity approximating that of plasma. One litre of fluid was infused into the thorax, and suction was applied at -20 cm H2O for 30 min.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When D5W was infused, the split drain left a residual volume of 53 ± 99 ml (mean value ± SD) vs. 148 ± 120 for the separate drain (P=0.007), representing a drainage efficiency (i.e. drained vol/[drained + residual vol]) of 95 ± 10% vs. 86 ± 12% for the separate drains (P = 0.011). In the second series, the split drain evacuated more 0.58 M sucrose in the first minute (967 ± 129 ml) than the separate drains (680 ± 192 ml, P<0.001). By 30 min, the split drain evacuated a similar volume of sucrose vs. the conventional drain (1089 ± 72 vs. 1056 ± 78 ml; P = 0.5). Residual volume tended to be lower (25 ± 10 vs. 62 ± 72 ml; P = 0.128) and drainage efficiency tended to be higher (98 ± 1 vs. 95 ± 6%; P = 0.111) with the split drain vs. conventional separate drains.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The split chest tube drained the thoracic cavity at least as effectively as conventional separate tubes. This new device could potentially alleviate postoperative complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":89581,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical & experimental cardiology","volume":"5 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4172/2155-9880.1000321","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Novel Split Chest Tube Improves Post-Surgical Thoracic Drainage.\",\"authors\":\"Albert H Olivencia-Yurvati, Brandon H Cherry, Hunaid A Gurji, Daniel W White, J Tyler Newton, Gary F Scott, Besim Hoxha, Terence Gourlay, Robert T Mallet\",\"doi\":\"10.4172/2155-9880.1000321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Conventional, separate mediastinal and pleural tubes are often inefficient at draining thoracic effusions.</p><p><strong>Description: </strong>We developed a Y-shaped chest tube with split ends that divide within the thoracic cavity, permitting separate intrathoracic placement and requiring a single exit port. In this study, thoracic drainage by the split drain vs. that of separate drains was tested.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After sternotomy, pericardiotomy, and left pleurotomy, pigs were fitted with separate chest drains (n=10) or a split tube prototype (n=9) with internal openings positioned in the mediastinum and in the costo-diaphragmatic recess. Separate series of experiments were conducted to test drainage of D5W or 0.58 M sucrose, an aqueous solution with viscosity approximating that of plasma. One litre of fluid was infused into the thorax, and suction was applied at -20 cm H2O for 30 min.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When D5W was infused, the split drain left a residual volume of 53 ± 99 ml (mean value ± SD) vs. 148 ± 120 for the separate drain (P=0.007), representing a drainage efficiency (i.e. drained vol/[drained + residual vol]) of 95 ± 10% vs. 86 ± 12% for the separate drains (P = 0.011). In the second series, the split drain evacuated more 0.58 M sucrose in the first minute (967 ± 129 ml) than the separate drains (680 ± 192 ml, P<0.001). By 30 min, the split drain evacuated a similar volume of sucrose vs. the conventional drain (1089 ± 72 vs. 1056 ± 78 ml; P = 0.5). Residual volume tended to be lower (25 ± 10 vs. 62 ± 72 ml; P = 0.128) and drainage efficiency tended to be higher (98 ± 1 vs. 95 ± 6%; P = 0.111) with the split drain vs. conventional separate drains.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The split chest tube drained the thoracic cavity at least as effectively as conventional separate tubes. This new device could potentially alleviate postoperative complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":89581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical & experimental cardiology\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4172/2155-9880.1000321\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical & experimental cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9880.1000321\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical & experimental cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9880.1000321","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:传统的胸腔和纵隔隔管引流胸腔积液效果不佳。描述:我们开发了一种y形胸管,其分叉端在胸腔内分开,允许单独的胸腔内放置,并且需要一个单独的出口。在本研究中,我们比较了劈开引流管与单独引流管的胸腔引流。方法:猪经胸骨切开、心包切开和左胸膜切开后,分别安装独立胸腔引流管(n=10)或分离式管原型(n=9),其内部开口位于纵隔和肋膈隐窝。分别进行了一系列实验,以测试D5W或0.58 M蔗糖(粘度接近等离子体的水溶液)的排水性。将1升液体注入胸腔,在-20 cm H2O下吸力30 min。结果:D5W输注时,分路引流管剩余容积为53±99 ml(平均值±SD),分路引流管剩余容积为148±120 ml (P=0.007),引流效率(即排出容积/[排出容积+剩余容积])为95±10%,分路引流管剩余容积为86±12% (P= 0.011)。在第二组病例中,劈开胸管第一分钟排出的蔗糖量(967±129 ml)比单独引流多0.58 M(680±192 ml)。结论:劈开胸管对胸腔的引流效果至少与常规单独引流相同。这种新装置有可能减轻术后并发症。
Objective: Conventional, separate mediastinal and pleural tubes are often inefficient at draining thoracic effusions.
Description: We developed a Y-shaped chest tube with split ends that divide within the thoracic cavity, permitting separate intrathoracic placement and requiring a single exit port. In this study, thoracic drainage by the split drain vs. that of separate drains was tested.
Methods: After sternotomy, pericardiotomy, and left pleurotomy, pigs were fitted with separate chest drains (n=10) or a split tube prototype (n=9) with internal openings positioned in the mediastinum and in the costo-diaphragmatic recess. Separate series of experiments were conducted to test drainage of D5W or 0.58 M sucrose, an aqueous solution with viscosity approximating that of plasma. One litre of fluid was infused into the thorax, and suction was applied at -20 cm H2O for 30 min.
Results: When D5W was infused, the split drain left a residual volume of 53 ± 99 ml (mean value ± SD) vs. 148 ± 120 for the separate drain (P=0.007), representing a drainage efficiency (i.e. drained vol/[drained + residual vol]) of 95 ± 10% vs. 86 ± 12% for the separate drains (P = 0.011). In the second series, the split drain evacuated more 0.58 M sucrose in the first minute (967 ± 129 ml) than the separate drains (680 ± 192 ml, P<0.001). By 30 min, the split drain evacuated a similar volume of sucrose vs. the conventional drain (1089 ± 72 vs. 1056 ± 78 ml; P = 0.5). Residual volume tended to be lower (25 ± 10 vs. 62 ± 72 ml; P = 0.128) and drainage efficiency tended to be higher (98 ± 1 vs. 95 ± 6%; P = 0.111) with the split drain vs. conventional separate drains.
Conclusion: The split chest tube drained the thoracic cavity at least as effectively as conventional separate tubes. This new device could potentially alleviate postoperative complications.