Objective:To assess the merits and demerits of placing small-sized tube as drainage compared with traditional drainage in patients after uniportal thoracoscopic lung wedge-resection.Methods:Patients who received uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (U-VATS) lung wedge-resection were identified in our database. Patients placed small-sized tube drainage were compared with those placed traditional 28 Fr chest tube in terms of characteristics, perioperative outcomes. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the baseline of the patients.Results:Of the 178 enrolled patients, 121 were assigned to conventional tube group and 57 were assigned to small-sized tube group. After matching, 36 pairs of patients from the two groups were selected for statistical comparison. Compared with the traditional drainage group, the operation duration of the small-sized tube group was shorter[0.83(0.75, 1.04)h vs.1.08(0.96, 1.41)h, P=0.003], intraoperative blood loss was less [5(5, 10) ml vs. 10(7.5, 10) ml, P=0.001), postoperative total drainage volume was less[67.5(30, 190)ml vs.175(120, 365)ml, P<0.001], and postoperative pain score was lower[0.3(0.3, 0.7) vs.0.7(0.3, 2.2), P<0.05]. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of small amount of pneumothorax or small amount of pleural effusion before extubation between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative complications was relatively low and there was no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion:Compared to conventional chest tube, small-sized tube for postoperative drainage after U-VATS lung wedge-resection, may be a feasible and promising approach to reduce postoperative pain and promote recovery.