Tianjin Medical Journal ›› 2018, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (10): 1055-1058.doi: 10.11958/20180777

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Study on the feasibility of thoracic drainage with central venous catheter after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic bullectomy

YANG Bo1, LI Xiao-ping1, YAN Xiao-long2, WANG Wen-chen3, LI Lei1, ZHANG Liang1, LI Ming-jiang1△, ZHANG Wei-dong1△   

  1. 1 Department of Thoracic Surgery, Tianjin First Center Hospital, Tianjin 300192, China; 2 Department of Thoracic Surgery, Tangdu Hospital, the Fourth Military Medical University; 3 Department of Thoracic Surgery, Air Force General Hospital △Corresponding Author LI Ming-jiang E-mail:lmj777@sina.com; ZHANG Wei-dong E-mail:zhangweidongchest@163.com
  • Received:2018-05-14 Revised:2018-08-03 Published:2018-10-15 Online:2018-11-09

Abstract: Abstract: Objective To investigate the validity, security, feasibility and superiority of the clinical application of central venous catheter instead of traditional thoracic drainage tube in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UVATS) based on the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Methods The clinical data of 194 patients who underwent spontaneous pneumothorax in the Tianjin First Central Hospital from June 2013 to November 2016 were included in this study. Patients were divided into central venous catheter group (CVC group) and 28 F polyvinylchlorid chest tube group (28 F group), 97 cases in each group. Clinical effects, chest drainage volume and related complications were compared between the two groups. Results The hospital stay[(3.4±1.1) d vs. (5.9±1.7) d], leave-bed time after operation[(4.7±0.7) h vs. (11.5±2.5) h]and remove drainage tube time[(34.9±5.4) h vs. (72.3±9.8) h]were significantly less in CVC group than those of 28 F group (P<0.05). The pain score (3.1±1.4 vs. 7.0±2.5) and incidence of poor wound healing of drainage (100% vs. 93.8%) were also less in CVC group than those of 28 F group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the complication of lung infection (1.0% vs. 3.1%), subcutaneous emphysema (4.1% vs. 2.1%) and persistent leakage (1.0% vs. 3.1%) between the two groups. Conclusion The application of the central venous catheter technology in uniportal video assisted thoracoscopic bullectomy is superior to the traditional thoracic drainage, and which is worthy of clinical promotion.

Key words: central venous, thoracoscopes, bullae of lung, enhanced recovery after surgery