Traditional chest drainage versus drainage by thoracotomy: a prospective randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the chest tube drainage by the same thoracotomy intercostal space with the traditional approach in patients undergoing muscle-sparing thoracotomy. METHODS: We evaluated 40 patients aged ≥18 years who underwent elective muscle sparing thoracotomies. Patients were divided into two groups of 20 patients. One group underwent thoracic drainage by the same intercostal space of thoracotomy and the other by traditional chest drainage approach. RESULTS: The mean length of hospital stay for the intercostal drainage group in the intensive care unit was 1.5 day (1.0 to 2.0 days) and 2.0 days (25.1 to 3.0 days) for the traditional chest drainage group (p=0.060). The intercostal drainage group had mean length of hospital stay (p=0.527) and drainage (p=0.547) of 4 days, and the traditional chest drainage group and 2 and 5.5 days, respectively. Dipirona and tramadol doses did not differ between groups (p=0.201 and p=0.341). The mean pain scale values on first postoperative was 4.24 in the drainage by the same intercostal group and 3.95 in the traditional chest drainage (p=0.733). In third postoperative day, mean was 3.18 for the first group and 3.11 for the traditional group (p=0.937). In the 15th day after surgery, drainage by the incision was 1.53 and the traditional chest drainage was 2.11 (p=0.440), 30th days after drainage by incision was 0.71 and traditional chest drainage was 0.84 (p=0.787). Complications, for both groups were similar with 30% in proposed drainage and 25% in traditional approach (p=0.723). CONCLUSION: Drainage by the same thoracotomy intercostal space was feasible and results 30 days after surgery were not inferior to those of the traditional chest drainage approach.

Traditional chest drainage versus drainage by thoracotomy: a prospective randomized study / Drenagem torácica tradicional versus drenagem pela toracotomia: estudo prospectivo randomizado

ABSTRACT Objective To compare the chest tube drainage by the same thoracotomy intercostal space with the traditional approach in patients undergoing muscle-sparing thoracotomy. Methods We evaluated 40 patients aged ≥18 years who underwent elective muscle sparing thoracotomies. Patients were divided into two groups of 20 patients. One group underwent thoracic drainage by the same intercostal space of thoracotomy and the other by traditional chest drainage approach. Results The mean length of hospital stay for the intercostal drainage group in the intensive care unit was 1.5 day (1.0 to 2.0 days) and 2.0 days (25.1 to 3.0 days) for the traditional chest drainage group (p=0.060). The intercostal drainage group had mean length of hospital stay (p=0.527) and drainage (p=0.547) of 4 days, and the traditional chest drainage group and 2 and 5.5 days, respectively. Dipirona and tramadol doses did not differ between groups (p=0.201 and p=0.341). The mean pain scale values on first postoperative was 4.24 in the drainage by the same intercostal group and 3.95 in the traditional chest drainage (p=0.733). In third postoperative day, mean was 3.18 for the first group and 3.11 for the traditional group (p=0.937). In the 15th day after surgery, drainage by the incision was 1.53 and the traditional chest drainage was 2.11 (p=0.440), 30th days after drainage by incision was 0.71 and traditional chest drainage was 0.84 (p=0.787). Complications, for both groups were similar with 30% in proposed drainage and 25% in traditional approach (p=0.723). Conclusion Drainage by the same thoracotomy intercostal space was feasible and results 30 days after surgery were not inferior to those of the traditional chest drainage approach.

RESUMO Objetivo Comparar a drenagem torácica pela mesma intercostotomia à drenagem tradicional em pacientes submetidos à toracotomia poupadora lateral. Métodos Foram avaliados 40 pacientes maiores de 18 anos submetidos a toracotomias poupadoras laterais eletivas. Eles foram separados em dois grupos de 20 pacientes cada, sendo um submetido à drenagem torácica pelo mesmo espaço intercostal da toracotomia e o outro à drenagem tradicional. Resultados No grupo da drenagem pela mesma intercostotomia, a mediana de tempo de internação em unidade de terapia intensiva foi de 1,5 dia (1,0 a 2,0 dias) e de 2,0 dias (1,25 a 3,0 dias) na drenagem tradicional (p=0,060). As medianas do tempo de internação (p=0,527) e de drenagem (p=0,547) foram ambas de 4 dias, no primeiro grupo, e de 2 e 5,5 dias, no grupo com drenagem tradicional. As doses utilizadas de dipirona e de tramadol não apresentaram diferenças estatísticas entre os grupos (p=0,201 e p=0,341). As médias da escala de dor foram 4,24 no primeiro dia pós-operatório do grupo com a drenagem proposta e 3,95 nos drenados da forma tradicional (p=0,733); no terceiro pós-operatório, foi de 3,18 para o grupo drenado pela incisão e de 3,11 nos drenados da forma tradicional (p=0,937). No 15º dia após a cirurgia, a drenagem pela incisão foi de 1,53 e a tradicional de 2,11 (p=0,440); no 30º pós-operatório, foi de 0,71 e 0,84, respectivamente, para a incisão e a forma tradicional (p=0,787). Em relação às complicações, os grupos foram semelhantes, com 30% na drenagem proposta e 25% na drenagem tradicional (p=0,723). Conclusão A drenagem pelo mesmo espaço intercostal foi exequível e não apresentou inferioridade à técnica tradicional no período pós-operatório estudado de 30 dias.

Comparative study of transepidermal water loss in patients with and without hyperhidrosis by closed-chamber measurer in an air-conditioned environment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the difference in transepidermal water loss in patients diagnosed with hyperhidrosis and healthy subjects, in an air-conditioned environment. METHODS: Twenty patients diagnosed with hyperhidrosis and 20 healthy subjects were subjected to quantitative assessment using a closed-chamber device, in six previously established sites. RESULTS: The measurements showed different transepidermal water loss values for healthy subjects and patients with hyperhidrosis, especially in the hands and feet. In the Control Group, the median for the hands was 46.4g/m2/hour (p25: 36.0; p75: 57.6), while in the Hyperhidrosis Group, the median was 123.5g/m2/hour (p25: 54.3; p75: 161.2) - p<0.001. For the feet, the Control Group had a median of 41.5g/m2/hour (p25: 31.3; p75: 63.5) and the Hyperhidrosis Group, 61.2g/m2/hour (p25: 32.3; p75: 117) - p<0.02. Measurements of the axillas also showed differences. In the Control Group, the median was 14.8g/m2/hour (p25: 11.8; p75: 19.0) and, in the Hyperhidrosis Group, 83.5g/m2/hour (p25: 29.5; p75: 161.7) - p<0.001. CONCLUSION: Measuring transepidermal water loss is sufficient for diagnosis and follow-up of patients with hyperhidrosis.

Comparative study of transepidermal water loss in patients with and without hyperhidrosis by closed-chamber measurer in an air-conditioned environment / Estudo comparativo da perda transepidérmica de água em pacientes com e sem hiperidrose por mensurador de câmara fechada em ambiente climatizado

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the difference in transepidermal water loss in patients diagnosed with hyperhidrosis and healthy subjects, in an air-conditioned environment. Methods Twenty patients diagnosed with hyperhidrosis and 20 healthy subjects were subjected to quantitative assessment using a closed-chamber device, in six previously established sites. Results The measurements showed different transepidermal water loss values for healthy subjects and patients with hyperhidrosis, especially in the hands and feet. In the Control Group, the median for the hands was 46.4g/m2/hour (p25: 36.0; p75: 57.6), while in the Hyperhidrosis Group, the median was 123.5g/m2/hour (p25: 54.3; p75: 161.2) - p<0.001. For the feet, the Control Group had a median of 41.5g/m2/hour (p25: 31.3; p75: 63.5) and the Hyperhidrosis Group, 61.2g/m2/hour (p25: 32.3; p75: 117) - p<0.02. Measurements of the axillas also showed differences. In the Control Group, the median was 14.8g/m2/hour (p25: 11.8; p75: 19.0) and, in the Hyperhidrosis Group, 83.5g/m2/hour (p25: 29.5; p75: 161.7) - p<0.001. Conclusion Measuring transepidermal water loss is sufficient for diagnosis and follow-up of patients with hyperhidrosis.

RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a diferença entre a perda transepidérmica de água aferida entre pacientes com e sem diagnóstico de hiperidrose, em ambiente climatizado. Métodos Foram selecionados 20 pacientes com diagnóstico de hiperidrose e 20 hígidos, submetidos à aferição de maneira quantitativa, com mensurador de câmara fechada, em seis locais previamente estabelecidos. Resultados As medidas realizadas mostraram valores diferentes de perda transepidérmica de água em pessoas hígidas e naquelas com hiperidrose, principalmente em mãos e pés. No Grupo Controle, a mediana das aferições em mãos foi 46,4g/m2/hora (p25: 36,0; p75: 57,6), enquanto, no Grupo Hiperidrose, obtivemos a mediana de 123,5g/m2/hora (p25: 54,3; p75: 161,2) - p<0,001. Já nos pés, a mediana no Grupo Controle foi 41,5g/m2/hora (p25: 31,3; p75: 63,5) e, no Grupo Hiperidrose, foi 61,2g/m2/hora (p25: 32,3; p75: 117) - p<0,02. As medidas das regiões axilares também mostraram diferença. No Grupo Controle, obtivemos mediana 14,8g/m2/hora (p25: 11,8; p75: 19,0) e, no Hiperidrose, 83,5g/m2/hora (p25: 29,5; p75: 161,7) - p<0,001. Conclusão A mensuração da perda transepidérmica de água é suficiente para diagnóstico e acompanhamento de pacientes com hiperidrose.