Clinical Evaluation and Outcomes of Digital Chest Drainage after Lung Resection

Access this Article

Search this Article

Author(s)

    • Shoji Fumihiro
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
    • Takamori Shinkichi
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
    • Akamine Takaki
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
    • Toyokawa Gouji
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
    • Morodomi Yosuke
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
    • Okamoto Tatsuro
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
    • Maehara Yoshihiko
    • Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan

Abstract

<p>Background: Analog chest drainage systems (ACS) are generally used to monitor postoperative alveolar air leakage (PAL) after lung resection. An electronic digital chest drainage system (DCS) has recently been developed that reportedly has several advantages over the traditional ACS. Here, we report a single institution's experience of PAL management with the DCS. We also sought to establish whether DCS had superior clinical benefits and outcomes compared with ACS.</p><p>Methods: We enrolled 112 consecutive patients who underwent lung resection and were subsequently managed with DCS. We compared PAL rate, duration of chest drainage, and the incidence of complications with a group of 121 consecutive patients previously managed with ACS after lung resection, using propensity score matching.</p><p>Results: Mean maximum and minimum PAL rates during DCS chest drainage were 48.9 ml/min (range: 2.0–868.6 ml/min) and 0.1 ml/min (0.0–1.2 ml/min), respectively. Mean PAL rate at DCS removal was 1.3 ml/min (0.0–10.0 ml/min). After propensity score matching, mean duration of chest drainage was significantly shorter with DCS than ACS (2.7 days, range: 1–9 days, compared with 3.7 days, range: 1–21 days, respectively; <i>P</i> = 0.031).</p><p>Conclusions: Managing PAL with DCS after pulmonary resection appears to reduce the duration of chest drainage.</p>

Journal

  • Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

    Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 22(6), 354-358, 2016

    The Editorial Committee of Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Codes

Page Top