Cargando…

A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the value of a modified chest tube drainage strategy to a traditional drainage strategy in single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection. METHODS: From January 2019 to July 2021, we collected clinical data on 405 patients who underwent single‐port thoracosc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xu, Guobing, Du, Jianting, Zhang, Jiarong, Chen, Hao, Zheng, Bin, Yang, Zhang, Chen, Chun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35481947
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14438
_version_ 1784719458983477248
author Xu, Guobing
Du, Jianting
Zhang, Jiarong
Chen, Hao
Zheng, Bin
Yang, Zhang
Chen, Chun
author_facet Xu, Guobing
Du, Jianting
Zhang, Jiarong
Chen, Hao
Zheng, Bin
Yang, Zhang
Chen, Chun
author_sort Xu, Guobing
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the value of a modified chest tube drainage strategy to a traditional drainage strategy in single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection. METHODS: From January 2019 to July 2021, we collected clinical data on 405 patients who underwent single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection in the No.1 Department of Thoracic Surgery at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, with 121 (29.9%) cases in the modified drainage strategy group and 284 (70.1%) cases in the traditional drainage strategy group. The propensity score matching method (Match Ratio = 1:1) was used to reduce differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: Following 1:1 propensity score matching, 120 matched pairs (240 patients) were included in the study. There was no significant difference in general clinical characteristics between the two groups. There was no statistical difference in intraoperative factors except for operative times (71.42 ± 22.98 min vs. 86.80 ± 36.75 min, p < 0.001). In terms of postoperative factors, there were significant differences in postoperative chest tube duration (0.00 ± 0.00 h vs. 32.68 ± 18.51 h, p < 0.001), total drainage volume (143.03 ± 118.33 ml vs. 187.73 ± 140.82 ml, p = 0.008), postoperative hospital stay (2.61 ± 0.70 days vs. 3.27 ± 1.88 days, p < 0.001), number of additional pain relief (0.14 ± 0.40 vs. 0.42 ± 0.74, p < 0.001), facial pain score (2.7 ± 1.8 vs. 3.6 ± 2.7, p = 0.005) and adverse events (p = 0.046). Furthermore, there was a statistical difference between the two groups regarding CTCAE grade‐1 complication, but no statistical difference in CTCAE grade‐2 complication. CONCLUSIONS: A modified drainage strategy in single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection is safe and feasible, allowing for less postoperative rehabilitation time, pain relief, reduced postoperative pleural effusion, and reduced clinical workload.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9161322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91613222022-06-04 A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection Xu, Guobing Du, Jianting Zhang, Jiarong Chen, Hao Zheng, Bin Yang, Zhang Chen, Chun Thorac Cancer Original Articles PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the value of a modified chest tube drainage strategy to a traditional drainage strategy in single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection. METHODS: From January 2019 to July 2021, we collected clinical data on 405 patients who underwent single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection in the No.1 Department of Thoracic Surgery at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, with 121 (29.9%) cases in the modified drainage strategy group and 284 (70.1%) cases in the traditional drainage strategy group. The propensity score matching method (Match Ratio = 1:1) was used to reduce differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: Following 1:1 propensity score matching, 120 matched pairs (240 patients) were included in the study. There was no significant difference in general clinical characteristics between the two groups. There was no statistical difference in intraoperative factors except for operative times (71.42 ± 22.98 min vs. 86.80 ± 36.75 min, p < 0.001). In terms of postoperative factors, there were significant differences in postoperative chest tube duration (0.00 ± 0.00 h vs. 32.68 ± 18.51 h, p < 0.001), total drainage volume (143.03 ± 118.33 ml vs. 187.73 ± 140.82 ml, p = 0.008), postoperative hospital stay (2.61 ± 0.70 days vs. 3.27 ± 1.88 days, p < 0.001), number of additional pain relief (0.14 ± 0.40 vs. 0.42 ± 0.74, p < 0.001), facial pain score (2.7 ± 1.8 vs. 3.6 ± 2.7, p = 0.005) and adverse events (p = 0.046). Furthermore, there was a statistical difference between the two groups regarding CTCAE grade‐1 complication, but no statistical difference in CTCAE grade‐2 complication. CONCLUSIONS: A modified drainage strategy in single‐port thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection is safe and feasible, allowing for less postoperative rehabilitation time, pain relief, reduced postoperative pleural effusion, and reduced clinical workload. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2022-04-28 2022-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9161322/ /pubmed/35481947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14438 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Thoracic Cancer published by China Lung Oncology Group and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Xu, Guobing
Du, Jianting
Zhang, Jiarong
Chen, Hao
Zheng, Bin
Yang, Zhang
Chen, Chun
A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
title A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
title_full A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
title_fullStr A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
title_full_unstemmed A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
title_short A propensity sore‐matched study: Applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
title_sort propensity sore‐matched study: applying a modified chest tube drainage strategy in rapid rehabilitation following uni‐portal thoracoscopic pulmonary wedge resection
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35481947
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14438
work_keys_str_mv AT xuguobing apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT dujianting apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT zhangjiarong apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT chenhao apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT zhengbin apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT yangzhang apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT chenchun apropensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT xuguobing propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT dujianting propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT zhangjiarong propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT chenhao propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT zhengbin propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT yangzhang propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection
AT chenchun propensitysorematchedstudyapplyingamodifiedchesttubedrainagestrategyinrapidrehabilitationfollowinguniportalthoracoscopicpulmonarywedgeresection