Cargando…

Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Despite importance of chest tube insertion in chest trauma, there is no general agreement on the level of daily volume drainage from chest tube. This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety of chest tube removal at the levels of 150 ml/day and 200 ml/day. METHODS: Eli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ali Hessami, Mohammad, Najafi, Farid, Hatami, Sajad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3134902/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21483189
http://dx.doi.org/10.5249/jivr.v1i1.5
_version_ 1782208026440105984
author Ali Hessami, Mohammad
Najafi, Farid
Hatami, Sajad
author_facet Ali Hessami, Mohammad
Najafi, Farid
Hatami, Sajad
author_sort Ali Hessami, Mohammad
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite importance of chest tube insertion in chest trauma, there is no general agreement on the level of daily volume drainage from chest tube. This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety of chest tube removal at the levels of 150 ml/day and 200 ml/day. METHODS: Eligible patients (138) who needed replacement of chest tube (because of trauma or malignancy) were randomized into two groups; control (removal of chest tube when drainage reached to 150 ml/day) and trial (removal of chest tube at the level of 200 ml/day). All patients received standard care during hospital admission and a follow-up visit after 7days of discharge from hospital. Patients were then compared in terms of major clinical outcomes using chisquared and t-test. RESULTS: From the total of 138 patients, 70 and 68 patients were randomized to control (G150) and trial (G200) group, respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Although the trial group had a shorter mean for length of hospital stay (LOS) (4.1 compared to 4.8, p=0.04), their differences in drainage time did not reach to the level of statistical significance (p=0.1). Analysis of data showed no statistically significant differences between the rate of radiological reaccumulation, thoracentesis and decrease in pulmonary sounds (auscultatory), one week after discharge from hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a daily volume drainage of 150 ml, removal of chest tube when there is 200 ml/day is safe and will even result in a shorter hospital stay. This in turn leads to a lower cost.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3134902
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31349022011-09-20 Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial Ali Hessami, Mohammad Najafi, Farid Hatami, Sajad J Inj Violence Res Injury & Violence BACKGROUND: Despite importance of chest tube insertion in chest trauma, there is no general agreement on the level of daily volume drainage from chest tube. This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety of chest tube removal at the levels of 150 ml/day and 200 ml/day. METHODS: Eligible patients (138) who needed replacement of chest tube (because of trauma or malignancy) were randomized into two groups; control (removal of chest tube when drainage reached to 150 ml/day) and trial (removal of chest tube at the level of 200 ml/day). All patients received standard care during hospital admission and a follow-up visit after 7days of discharge from hospital. Patients were then compared in terms of major clinical outcomes using chisquared and t-test. RESULTS: From the total of 138 patients, 70 and 68 patients were randomized to control (G150) and trial (G200) group, respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Although the trial group had a shorter mean for length of hospital stay (LOS) (4.1 compared to 4.8, p=0.04), their differences in drainage time did not reach to the level of statistical significance (p=0.1). Analysis of data showed no statistically significant differences between the rate of radiological reaccumulation, thoracentesis and decrease in pulmonary sounds (auscultatory), one week after discharge from hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a daily volume drainage of 150 ml, removal of chest tube when there is 200 ml/day is safe and will even result in a shorter hospital stay. This in turn leads to a lower cost. Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences 2009-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3134902/ /pubmed/21483189 http://dx.doi.org/10.5249/jivr.v1i1.5 Text en Copyright © 2009, KUMS http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Injury & Violence
Ali Hessami, Mohammad
Najafi, Farid
Hatami, Sajad
Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Volume Threshold for Chest Tube Removal: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort volume threshold for chest tube removal: a randomized controlled trial
topic Injury & Violence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3134902/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21483189
http://dx.doi.org/10.5249/jivr.v1i1.5
work_keys_str_mv AT alihessamimohammad volumethresholdforchesttuberemovalarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT najafifarid volumethresholdforchesttuberemovalarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hatamisajad volumethresholdforchesttuberemovalarandomizedcontrolledtrial