Clinical comparison of two thoracic drainage methods after thoracoscopic pneumonectomy
- VernacularTitle:胸腔镜全肺切除术后两种胸腔引流方式的临床观察
- Author:
CHEN Bei
1
;
DING Junrong
1
;
WANG Hua
1
;
CHEN Jian
1
;
JIANG Lei
1
Author Information
1. Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, P.R.China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Pneumonectomy;
thoracoscopy;
lung cancer;
drainage
- From:
Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2019;26(11):1088-1091
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To explore an effective and safe drainage method, by comparing open thoracic drainage and conventional thoracic drainage for lung cancer patients after thoracoscopic pneumonectomy. Methods The clinical data of 147 patients who underwent thoracoscopic pneumonectomy from January 2015 to March 2018 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed, including 128 males and 19 females. Based on drainage methods, they were divided into an open drainage group (open group) and a conventional drainage group (regular group). The incidence of postoperative complications, chest tube duration, drainage volume at postoperative 3 days, postoperative hospital stay, hospitalization cost and quality of life were compared between the two groups. Results Postoperative complication rate was lower in the open group than that in the regular group (10.20% vs. 23.47%, P=0.04). The chest tube duration of the open group was longer compared with the regular group (5.57±2.36 d vs. 3.22±1.23 d, P<0.001). The drainage volume at postoperative 3 days was less in the regular group. In the open group, ambulation was earlier, thoracocentesis was less and re-intubation rate was lower (all P<0.001). The postoperative hospital stay in the regular group was significantly longer than that in the open group (8.37±2.56 d vs. 6.35±1.87 d, P<0.001) and hospitalization cost was significantly higher (66.2±5.4 thousand yuan vs. 59.6±7.3 thousand yuan, P<0.001). Besides, quality of life in 1 and 3 months after operation was significantly better than that in the open group (P<0.001). Conclusion Compared with the regular chest drainage, the effect of open thoracic drainage is better, which can help reduce postoperative complications, shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce the hospitalization cost and improve the quality of postoperative life. It is worthy of clinical promotion.
