Early Chest Tube Removal After Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy with High Output

Yao, Fei; Wang, Jian; Yao, Jun; Hang, Fangrong; Cao, Shougen; Qian, Junling; Xu, Liping

doi:10.1089/lap.2015.0454

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Approximately 44% of UGI surgeons would remove basal ICCs if the daily output is <200 mL/24 h, for both two‐ and three‐stage oesophagectomies. This is consistent with the study by Yao et al . comparing ICC removal at drain outputs of <300 and <150 mL/24 h, which found no difference in length of hospital stay or complication rates.…”

supporting

confidence: 92%

Chest drain management post‐oesophagectomy: a survey of Australian and New Zealand surgeons

Tang

Fenton‐Lee

2019

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 92%

Chest drain management post‐oesophagectomy: a survey of Australian and New Zealand surgeons

Tang

Fenton‐Lee

2019

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The main problem is the drainage of the hydrothorax. [11] For the mediastinal tube, we made double holes every 3 centimeters from the beginning to 25 cm to avoid blockage and to ensure drainage from the top aside the anastomosis and the lowest part of the thoracic cavity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of a single mediastinal drain through the abdominal wall after esophagectomy

Zheng

Liu

et al. 2018

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of a single mediastinal drainage tube in the thoracic and abdominal cavity after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). This study was undertaken to determine if the procedure could be included in a fast-track surgery program for resectable esophageal carcinoma (EC).From June 17 to November 30, 2015, clinical data for 78 eligible patients who had undergone a fast-track surgery program and MIE were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-eight patients had a chest tube and mediastinal drainage tube. Thirty-four patients had only a mediastinal drainage tube through the intercostal space. The remaining 30 patients had a single mediastinal drainage tube in the thoracic and abdominal cavity through the abdominal wall. The complication rates and pain scores for each of the groups were compared. The statistical calculations were performed using SPSS 17.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). The quantitative data among the groups were compared using 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The Chi-square, Mann–Whitney U and Fisher exact tests were used for qualitative data analysis.There were no significant differences in the anastomotic leak rates, postoperative days and total complication rates (P = .861). The lowest visual analog scale (VAS) scores of the drainage tubes were observed in the group with a single mediastinal drain through the abdominal wall (P <.001).The results of this study suggested that a single mediastinal drainage tube in the thoracic and abdominal cavity after MIE may be safe and efficient. This clinical practice is a part of our fast-track surgery program.

show abstract

“…Reports are proposing best practices when using routine drainage tubes after gastrointestinal surgery on the basis of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). In particular, dispensable insertional objects should be avoided and if really required, they should be removed from patients as early as possible (12)(13)(14). In the present study, routine chest drainage tube was not placed and was not necessarily required after TMrE, because 77 patients (65%) underwent no or only a single DPE.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Management of Pleural Effusion After Mediastinoscopic Radical Esophagectomy

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aim: Trans-hiatal and-cervical approach mediastinoscopic radical esophagectomy (TMrE) for esophageal cancers is a less-invasive procedure and does not require for trans-thoracic approach management. However, some patients suffer from pleural effusion after TMrE. In the present study, we investigated the clinicopathological factors of patients needing drainage of pleural effusion (DPE) after TMrE. Patients and Methods: This study included 118 patients who underwent TMrE between 2010 and 2016. Results: There were 43, 34 and 41 patients that underwent none, a single, and two or more DPEs respectively. Left-side DPE was significantly more frequent compared to right-side DPE. Change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) levels after surgery was significantly higher in patients with multiple DPEs than patients with none or a single DPE. The hospitalization days were significantly longer for patients with multiple DPEs. Conclusion: Pleural effusion accumulates due to continuous inflammation. Although a temporary DPE is sometimes performed, post-operative chest drainage tubes are not necessarily needed.

show abstract

Early Chest Tube Removal After Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy with High Output

Abstract: This study showed that a 300 mL/day volume threshold for chest tube removal after TSE was capable of reducing the postoperative chest drainage time without compromising patient safety.

Cited by 17 publications

References 20 publications

Chest drain management post‐oesophagectomy: a survey of Australian and New Zealand surgeons

Chest drain management post‐oesophagectomy: a survey of Australian and New Zealand surgeons

Feasibility of a single mediastinal drain through the abdominal wall after esophagectomy

Management of Pleural Effusion After Mediastinoscopic Radical Esophagectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About