Original Article on Thoracic Surgery
Application of the coaxial smart drain in patients with a large air leak following anatomic lung resection: a prospective multicenter phase II analysis of efficacy and safety
Abstract
Background: The presence of air leak following lung resection remains a frequent problem, which may prolong hospital stay and increase hospital costs. In the past, some studies documented the efficacy of soft and flexible chest tube in patients who underwent thoracic surgery. Nevertheless, safety in case of post-operative large air or liquid leak remains questionable. The objective of this study was to verify through a multicentre study the safety and the effectiveness of the coaxial chest tube in a consecutive series of selected patients who underwent anatomical pulmonary resection and with an active and large air leak.
Methods: Between October 2016 and September 2017, data from patients submitted to anatomical lung resection with curative intent and operated in two Department of Thoracic Surgery of two different were prospectively collected. The inclusion criteria consisted in the presence of an air leak greater than 50 mL/min measured with a digital drainage system during the 3 postoperative hours. A descriptive statistic was used to report the incidence of complications assumed to be associated with the use of the coaxial drain.
Results: Forty-eight consecutive patients (27 males) submitted to lobectomy (37 patients: 77%) or anatomic segmentectomies (11 patients) were included in the analyses. Thirty-four operations (71%) were performed by video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). The median duration of chest tubes was 13 days [interquartile range (IQR), 4–19] and the median duration of air leak was 9 days (IQR, 2–17.5). No patient had undrained postoperative pleural effusion judged to require an additional chest tube placement. There were 12 (25%) cases of clinically or radiologically significant surgical emphysema; in none of these patients any additional procedure or re-operation was required, and they were treated conservatively by increasing the level of suction.
Conclusions: Our experience with this novel Coaxial Drain was satisfactory with no clinically relevant complication caused using this drain, no need to insert additional drain or replace the existing one with another drain a duration of air leak and chest tubes as well as the incidence of subcutaneous emphysema that was in line with what observed in the daily practice in similar highly selected patients with large air leak.
Methods: Between October 2016 and September 2017, data from patients submitted to anatomical lung resection with curative intent and operated in two Department of Thoracic Surgery of two different were prospectively collected. The inclusion criteria consisted in the presence of an air leak greater than 50 mL/min measured with a digital drainage system during the 3 postoperative hours. A descriptive statistic was used to report the incidence of complications assumed to be associated with the use of the coaxial drain.
Results: Forty-eight consecutive patients (27 males) submitted to lobectomy (37 patients: 77%) or anatomic segmentectomies (11 patients) were included in the analyses. Thirty-four operations (71%) were performed by video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). The median duration of chest tubes was 13 days [interquartile range (IQR), 4–19] and the median duration of air leak was 9 days (IQR, 2–17.5). No patient had undrained postoperative pleural effusion judged to require an additional chest tube placement. There were 12 (25%) cases of clinically or radiologically significant surgical emphysema; in none of these patients any additional procedure or re-operation was required, and they were treated conservatively by increasing the level of suction.
Conclusions: Our experience with this novel Coaxial Drain was satisfactory with no clinically relevant complication caused using this drain, no need to insert additional drain or replace the existing one with another drain a duration of air leak and chest tubes as well as the incidence of subcutaneous emphysema that was in line with what observed in the daily practice in similar highly selected patients with large air leak.
