The effects of cold compress and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on the pain associated with chest tube removal among patients with coronary bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Chest tube removal (CTR) can cause severe acute pain which is usually described by patients as a painful experience. This study compared the effects of cold compress, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), and combined cold compress-TENS on CTR-associated pain among patients with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 2018-2019 using a double-blind four-group design. Participants were 120 patients with CABG selected from Shafa hospital, Kerman, Iran, and randomly allocated to a cold compress, a TENS, a combined cold compress-TENS, and a placebo group (compress with room temperature) and TENS with an off TENS device. Each participant received the intervention for 15 min immediately before CTR. CTR-associated pain was assessed before, during, immediately after, and 15 min after CTR. Data were analyzed using the SPSS program (v. 22.0) at a significance level of less than 0.05. RESULTS: The data of 29 participants in the placebo group, 26 in the TENS group, 30 in the cold compress group, and 26 in the combined cold compress-TENS group was gathered. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and pain intensity scores of participants had no statistically significant differences among all four groups (P > 0.05). The mean score of pain intensity in all groups was at its highest level during CTR and gradually decreased afterwards, but this pain intensity reduction in the compress-TENS group was significantly greater than other groups (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Combined cold compress-TENS is more effective than separate cold compress and TENS in reducing CTR-associated pain among patients with CABG. Therefore, non-pharmacological methods such as combined cold compress-TENS are recommended for managing CTR-associated pain.

Patients' Perceptions of Experiences of Postoperative Chest Drain Tube Insertion: A Pilot Survey.

BACKGROUND: Pleural drainage is a routine procedure conducted after thoracotomy and thoracoscopy. It is used to remove air or excess fluid from a pleural cavity and enables proper lung expansion. Essential elements of care provided during hospitalization and treatment include meeting patients' growing expectations and continually improving quality while optimizing safety. AIM: This study aimed to explore patients' experiences with pleural drainage after thoracic surgery and their correlation with socio-demographic data. METHODS: A pilot survey with an exploratory design was conducted at a large teaching hospital in Poland, in the Department of Thoracic Surgery at the University Clinical Centre in Gdansk. The study involved the analysis of 100 randomly selected subjects with a chest tube drain. A self-designed questionnaire was used to collect social, demographic, and clinical data. Twenty-three questions related to experiences with pleural drainage, ailments, limitations in daily functioning, and security with a chest tube were evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale. Patients completed the questionnaire on the third postoperative day. RESULTS: Individuals fitted with a traditional water-seal drainage system felt safer than those from the digital drainage group (p = 0.017). Statistically significant differences were found in the assessment of nursing assistance (p = 0.025); the number of satisfied patients was greater in a group of unemployed people. No correlation was found between demographic and social factors and the patients' sense of security (gender: p = 0.348, age: p = 0.172, education level: p = 0.154, professional activity: p = 0.665). CONCLUSIONS: Demographic and social characteristics did not significantly affect patients' sense of safety with chest drainage types. Patients with traditional drainage felt significantly safer than patients with digital drainage. Patient knowledge of pleural drainage management was not satisfactory, with a number of patients indicating a lack of knowledge in this area. This is important information that should be considered when planning measures to improve the quality of care.

Early Water Seal of Chest Tubes Following Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Pleurodesis.

INTRODUCTION: Early water seal following minimally invasive pulmonary lobectomy has been shown to reduce chest tube duration and postoperative length of stay (LOS). We evaluated chest tube duration and postoperative LOS following a standardized chest tube management protocol change (water seal on postoperative day 1) after video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) pleurodesis. METHODS: We identified adult patients undergoing VATS pleurodesis from August 2013 to December 2021. The chest tube protocol was changed in January 2017 such that patients were placed to water seal on the morning of postoperative day 1. Patients were divided into two groups, before the change (Group 1: August 2013-December 2016) and after (Group 2: January 2017-December 2021). We compared demographics, clinical characteristics, operative details, postoperative chest tube duration and output, and postoperative LOS between the groups. Descriptive statistics and log-transformed multivariable linear regression models were used to identify differences in patient outcomes that were associated with the protocol change. RESULTS: A total of 488 patients underwent VATS pleurodesis during the study period (Group 1: 329 patients; Group 2: 159 patients). The median age was 61 y (interquartile range [IQR] 49-68), 51% were females, 69% were White, and 29% were Black. For postoperative LOS, Group 1 had an IQR of 3-7 d, while Group 2 had an IQR of 2-6 d (P < 0.001). The multivariable log-transformed linear regression models demonstrated that the practice change was associated with reduced chest tube duration (0.77 times the chest tube duration before the change; P < 0.001) and reduced LOS (0.81 times the LOS before the change; P = 0.006). There was an associated reduction in patients needing to return to the operating room (P = 0.048) and needing postoperative extended ventilatory support (P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Development of a standardized protocol to water seal chest tubes on postoperative day 1 following VATS pleurodesis is associated with reduced chest tube duration and LOS without an increase in postoperative complication rates.

A Novel Device With Improved Outcomes for Tube Thoracostomy.

INTRODUCTION: Tube thoracostomy is a common procedure for which competency is expected of all trauma providers, both surgical and nonsurgical. Although surgery residents have fewer complications than other resident specialties, complications relating to position and insertion are reported. We hypothesized the use of our novel chest tube placement device will improve chest tube placement efficiency while maintaining accuracy compared to the open Kelly clamp technique across multiple specialties. METHODS: A swine lab was conducted through an approved Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee device testing protocol. After a preprocedure, tutorial participants placed chest tubes with the device and Kelly clamps through predetermined incision sites. Placement positioning was determined by a postplacement chest X-ray. One way analysis of variance was used for intratechnique comparisons. Time to placement was compared using paired t-test; P- values of <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Intrathoracic device placement occurred with 94.4% (N = 68) of placements compared to 93.1% (N = 67) of Kelly clamp placements (P = 0.73). The device-placed chest tubes were apically positioned 94.4% (N = 68) compared to 66.7% (N = 48) (P < 0.01) of Kelly clamp-placed chest tubes. Novel device use chest tube placement was significantly faster with a mean time of 39.3 (±27.7) s compared to 61.5 (±38.6) s for the Kelly clamp (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this proof of concept study, our chest tube placement device improved efficiency and accuracy in chest tube placement when compared to the open Kelly clamp technique. This finding was consistent across thoracic trauma providers, including general surgery residents.

Efficacy and safety of early chest tube removal after selective pulmonary resection with high-output drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is controversy over the drainage threshold for removal of chest tubes in the absence of significant air leakage after selective pulmonary resection. METHODS: A comprehensive search of online databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Ovid, Elsevier, Ebsco, and Wiley) and clinical trial registries (WHO-ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov) was performed to investigate the efficacy and safety of early chest tube removal with high-output drainage. Primary outcome (postoperative hospital day) and secondary outcomes (30-day complications, rate of thoracentesis, and chest tube placement) were extracted and synthesized. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were used to explore the potential heterogeneity. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment by the online GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool. RESULTS: Six cohort studies with a total of 1262 patients were included in the final analysis. The postoperative hospital stay in the high-output group was significantly shorter than in the conventional treatment group (weighted mean difference: -1.34 [-2.34 to -0.34] day, P = .009). While there was no significant difference between 2 groups in 30-day complications (relative ratio [RR]: 0.92 [0.77-1.11], P = .38), the rate of thoracentesis (RR: 1.93 [0.63-5.88], P = .25) and the rate of chest tube placement (RR: 1.00 [0.37-2.70], P = .99). According to the sensitivity analysis, the relative impacts of the 2 groups had already stabilized. Subgroup analysis revealed that postoperative hospital stay was modified by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score. The online GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool presented very low quality of evidence for the available data. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis revealed that it is feasible and safe to remove a chest tube with high-output drainage after pulmonary resection for selected patients.

Experience of a modified chest tube suture-fixation technique in uniportal thoracoscopic pulmonary resection.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the feasibility and advantages of a modified chest tube suture-fixation technique in uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for pulmonary resection. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 116 patients who underwent uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (U-VATS) for lung diseases in Zhengzhou People's Hospital between October 2019 and October 2021. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the applied suture-fixation methods, i.e., 72 patients in the active group and 44 patients in the control group. The two groups were subsequently compared in the terms of gender, age, operation method, indwelling time of chest tube, postoperative pain score, chest tube removal time, wound healing grade, length of hospital stay, incision healing grade, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, operation method, indwelling time of chest tube, postoperative pain score, and length of hospital stay (P = 0.167, 0.185, 0.085, 0.051, 0.927, and 0.362, respectively). However, the chest tube removal time, incision healing grade, and incision scar satisfaction in the active group were significantly better compared with those of the control group (P = < 0.001, 0.033, and < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: In summary, the new suture-fixation approach can minimize the number of stitches, and time necessary for chest tube removal process, and avoid the pain experienced when removing the drainage tube. This method is more feasible, has better incision conditions, and provides a convenient tube removal, making it more suitable to patients.

Cyanoacrylate Tissue Adhesive After Chest Tube Removal in Children.

Background: After open or thoracoscopic lung biopsy, it is common to leave a chest tube as a postoperative drain that is typically removed on the first or second postoperative day. Standard technique is to apply an occlusive dressing at the site of chest tube removal using gauze and some form of tape. Methods: We reviewed the charts of children who underwent thoracoscopic lung biopsy at our institution for the past 9 years, many of whom left the operating room with a chest tube. When the tube was removed, the site was dressed, based on attending surgeon preference, with either cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Dermabond®; Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH) or a standard dressing with gauze and transparent occlusive adhesive dressing. Endpoints included wound complications and need for a secondary dressing. Results: Of 134 children who underwent thoracoscopic biopsy, 71 (53%) were given a chest tube. Chest tubes were removed at bedside in standard manner after a mean of 2.5 days. In 36 (50.7%) cyanoacrylate was used and in 35 (49.3%) a standard occlusive gauze dressing was used. No patient in either group suffered a wound dehiscence or needed a rescue dressing. There were no wound-related complications or surgical site infections in either group. Conclusion: Cyanoacrylate dressings are effective for closure of chest tube drain sites and appear to be safe. They might also save patients from having to deal with a bulky bandage and the discomfort of having a strong adhesive removed from their surgical site.

[Acupuncture with an Aftermath]. / Akupunktur mit Folgen.

Acupuncture with an Aftermath Abstract. A 70-year-old female patient presents with a 6-hour history of left sided thoracic pain and acutely exacerbated cough in the emergency department. Earlier in the morning she had undergone acupuncture therapy. The clinical examination revealed tachypnea with diminished breath sounds on the left side and hyperresonance to percussion. The laboratory findings revealed elevated D-Dimer and NT-proBNP. Due to the clinical presentation and the laboratory results, a CT scan of the chest was made, which confirmed the suspected left-side pneumothorax. The chest radiograph showed complete resolution of the pneumothorax within two days after chest tube placement.

Trocar vs. Seldinger small bore pleural drains: does the technique influence the outcomes? A prospective single-centre study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare two positioning techniques of 12-French (Fr) thoracic drains in terms of efficacy, safety, and patient comfort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a prospective, non-randomized, competitive, non-inferiority study comparing the Seldinger vs. Trocar technique. The primary endpoint was an analysis of the factors that led to unsuccessful drainage positioning. Between the two groups, clinical variables, procedure times, pain, and complications were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were enrolled in group 1 (Seldinger) and 45 in group 2 (Trocar). The mean procedural time was 7.93±3.02 min vs. 7.09±3.67 min, respectively (p: 0.33). The mean VAS for procedural pain was 2.22±1.47 vs. 2.80±1.88, p: 0.07, and the mean at day 2 was 3.6±1.2 in the SBWGD group vs. 2.7±1.1 in the Unico Group (p: 0.04). There was no difference in terms of complications, residual effusion, and pneumothorax at the first post-procedural chest X-ray. Four days after the procedure, the drain removal rate was 11.6% in group 1 vs. 25% in group 2 p: 0.063). The chest tube was removed after a mean period of 8.87±7.20 days after resolution of pleural effusion or tube dislodgement (7 cases in group 1 vs. 11 in group 2, p: 0.053). CONCLUSIONS: The two techniques resulted in comparable pain and complication rates. Both drains are well-tolerated and efficient at draining pleural effusion, with very low rates of complications and failure. We recommend inserting a longer tube for patients who require chest drainage for an extended period of time.

Evaluating emergency department tube thoracostomy: A single-center use of trauma video review to assess efficiency and technique.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department tube thoracostomy is a common procedure; however, assessing procedural skills is difficult. We sought to describe procedural variability and technical complications of emergency department tube thoracostomy using trauma video review. We hypothesized that factors such as hemodynamic abnormality lead to increased technical difficulty and malpositioning. METHODS: Using trauma video review, we reviewed all emergency department tube thoracostomy from 2020 to 2022. Patients were stratified into hemodynamically abnormal (systolic blood pressure <90 or heart rate >120) and hemodynamically normal (systolic blood pressure ≥90 or heart rate ≤120). Emergency department tube thoracostomies outside of video-capable rooms, with incomplete visualization, or in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation or resuscitative thoracotomy were excluded. The primary outcome was a procedure score modified from the validated tool ranging from 0 to 11 (higher score indicating better performance). Also measured were procedural times to (1) decision to place, (2) pleural entry, and (3) procedure completion. Postprocedure x-ray and chart review were used to determine accuracy. RESULTS: In total, 51 videos met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 34 [interquartile range 24-40] years, body mass index 25.8 [interquartile range 21.8-30.7], predominately male (75%), blunt injury (57%), with Injury Severity Score of 22 [14.5-41]. The median procedure score was 9 [7-10]. Emergency department tube thoracostomies in patients with abnormal hemodynamics had significantly lower procedure scores (8 vs 10, P < .05). Hemodynamically abnormal patients had significantly shorter times from decision to proceed to pleural entry (4.05 vs 8.25 minutes, P < .001), and to completion (6.31 vs 14.23 minutes, P < .001). The most common complication was malpositioning (35.1%), with no significant difference noted when comparing hemodynamically normal and abnormal patients (P = .41). CONCLUSION: Using trauma video review we identified significant procedural variability in emergency department tube thoracostomy, mainly that hemodynamic abnormality led to lower proficiency scores and increased malpositioning. Efforts are needed to define procedural benchmarks and evaluation in the context of patient outcomes. Using this technology and methodology can help establish procedural norms.

[Chest Tube in Thoracic Trauma - Recommendations of the Interdisciplinary Thoracic Trauma Task Group of the German Society for Thoracic Surgery (DGT) and the German Trauma Society (DGU)]. / Thoraxdrainage beim Thoraxtrauma ­ Empfehlungen der interdisziplinären Arbeitsgemeinschaft Thoraxtrauma der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Thoraxchirurgie (DGT) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (DGU).

For unstable patients with chest trauma, the chest tube is the method of choice for the treatment of a relevant pneumothorax or haemothorax. In the case of a tension pneumothorax, needle decompression with a cannula of at least 5 cm length should be performed, directly followed by the insertion of a chest tube. The evaluation of the patient should be performed primarily with a clinical examination, a chest X-ray and sonography, but the gold standard of diagnostic testing is computed tomography (CT).A small-bore chest tube (e.g. 14 French) should be used in stable patients, while unstable patients should receive a large-bore drain (24 French or larger). Insertion of chest drains has a high complication rate of between 5% and 25%, and incorrect positioning of the tube is the most common complication. However, incorrect positioning can usually only be reliably detected or ruled out with a CT scan, and chest X-rays proofed to be insufficient to answer this question. Therapy should be carried out with mild suction of approximately 20 cmH2O, and clamping the chest tube before removal showed no beneficial effect. The removal of drains can be safely performed, either at the end of inspiration or at the end of expiration. In order to reduce the high complication rate, in the future the focus should be more on the education and training of medical staff members.

Chest Tube Management: Past, Present, and Future Directions for Developing Evidence-Based Best Practices.

In the field of modern cardiothoracic surgery, chest drainage has become ubiquitous and yet characterized by a wide variation in practice. Meanwhile, the evolution of chest drain technology has created gaps in knowledge that represent opportunities for new research to support the development of best practices in chest drain management. The chest drain is an indispensable tool in the recovery of the cardiac surgery patient. However, decisions about chest drain management-including those about type, material, number, maintenance of patency, and the timing of removal-are largely driven by tradition due to a scarcity of quality evidence. This narrative review surveys the available evidence regarding chest-drain management practices with the objective of highlighting scientific gaps, unmet needs, and opportunities for further research.

Effectiveness of Single Chest Tube vs Double Chest Tube Application Postdecortication: Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Draining the chest cavity with 2 tubes is a common practice among thoracic surgeons. This research was conducted in Addis Ababa from March 2021 to May 2022. A total of 62 patients were included. STUDY DESIGN: This study was conducted to investigate the superiority of either single or double tube insertion after decortication. Patients were randomized in a ratio of 1:1. In group A, 2 tubes were inserted; in group B, single 32F tubes were inserted. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 27.0, Student's t test and Pearson chi-square test. RESULTS: The age range of patients was 18 to 70 years, with a mean of 44 ± 14.4434 years; the male to female ratio was 2.9:1. The dominant underlying pathologies were tuberculosis and trauma (45.2% vs 35.5%); the right side was more involved (62.3%). Drain output was 1,465 ± 1,887.9751 mL in group A vs 1,018 ± 802.5662 mL in group B (p value = 0.00001); the duration of drains was 7.5498 ± 11.3137 days in group A vs 3.8730 ± 1.4142 days in group B (p value = 0.000042). The degree of pain was 2.6458 ± 4.2426 vs 2.000 ± 2.1213 in group A and group B, respectively (p value = 0.326757). The length of hospital stay was 21.5818 ± 11.9791 days in group A vs 13.6091 ± 6.2048 days in group B (p value = 0.00001). Group A had air leak of 90.3% vs 74.2% in group B; subcutaneous emphysema was 9.7% in group A and 12.9% in group B. There was no fluid recollection, and no patients required tube reinsertion. CONCLUSIONS: The placement of a single tube after decortication is effective in reducing drain output, time of drain, and hospital stay. There was no association with pain, and there was no effect on other endpoints.

A Narrative Review of Traumatic Pneumothorax Diagnoses and Management.

BACKGROUND: Correct identification and rapid intervention of a traumatic pneumothorax is necessary to avoid hemodynamic collapse and subsequent morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this clinical review is to summarize the evaluation and best treatment strategies to improve outcomes in combat casualties. Blunt, explosive, and penetrating trauma are the 3 etiologies for causing a traumatic pneumothorax. Blunt trauma tends to be more common, but all etiologies require similar treatment. The current standard to diagnose pneumothorax is through imaging to include ultrasound, chest x-ray, or computed tomography. A physical exam aids in the diagnosis especially when few other resources are available. Recent studies on the treatment of a small, closed pneumothorax involve conservative care, which includes close observation of the patient and monitoring supplemental oxygen. For a large, closed pneumothorax, conservative treatment is still a possible option, but manual aspiration may be required. Less often, a needle or tube thoracostomy is needed to reinflate the lung. Large, open pneumothoraxes require the most invasive treatment with current guidelines recommending tube thoracostomy. More invasive management options can result in higher rates of complications. Given the significant variability in practice patterns, most notable in resource limited settings, the areas for potential research are presented.