Pre-embedding subcutaneous suture for chest-tube insertion in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for the treatment of lung cancer: a consensus report from Chinese Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (CSTCVS) and Chinese Association of Thoracic Surgeons (CATS)

Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UniVATS) has been widely adopted in China, where several ultra-high volume thoracic surgical and training centers are located. The objective of this consensus from Chinese experts was to summarize the current application and give reference for the future development of UniVATS in the treatment of lung cancer. A panel of 41 experts from 21 Chinese hospitals was invited to join this project. The Delphi method was used in this consensus consisting of two rounds of voting. The questionnaire was based on the current clinical evidence. Forty (97.6%) experts completed the 2 rounds of questionnaires. The experts’ experience was relatively similar. We defined the UniVATS as monitor-dependent surgery, no use of rib-spreading and single incision less than 4 cm. Tumor with stage of T1–T3 and N0–N2 is considered amenable to UniVATS. Other consensus was reached on several points outlining the safety and feasibility, surgical skills, learning curve, short-term and long-term outcomes for lung cancer, and current application of subxiphoid and nonintubated UniVATS approach. This consensus statement represents a collective agreement among Chinese experts to suggest that UniVATS is an effective alternative to multi-portal approach, although high-level evidence is expected in the future. Some agreements can be referred in the training of young surgeons.

Is a Chest Tube Necessary after Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Mediastinal Tumor Resection?

BACKGROUND

The omission of chest tubes after thoracoscopic procedures such as sympathectomy, lung biopsy, and lung resection has proven efficacious in decreasing pain and length of hospital stay in some cases. However, its safety for mediastinal diseases remains unclear. This study evaluated the feasibility and outcome of eliminating chest drains after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for mediastinal tumor resection.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 70 patients receiving VATS mediastinal tumor resection in a single institution between January 2016 and November 2018. A total of 39 patients (drain group) received postoperative chest drains and 31 patients (no-drain group) did not. Group clinical outcomes and operation data were compared. A propensity score matching analysis was further performed to yield a fairer comparison.

RESULTS

Before propensity score matching, the no-drain group had a higher prevalence of cystic lesions, a shorter operative time, and less blood loss compared with the drain group (p = 0.015, p = 0.018, and p < 0.001, respectively). After matching, the group differences in these perioperative variables lost significance (p = 0.095, 0.4, and 0.2, respectively). The no-drain group had lower postoperative day 2 pain scores and shorter postoperative hospital stays than the drain group, regardless of whether they were matched (pain: p = 0.028; hospital stay < 0.001) or not (pain: p = 0.003; hospital stay < 0.001). No major adverse events occurred in either group during hospitalization or follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Eliminating chest drain placement after VATS mediastinal tumor resection may benefit some patients and decrease postoperative pain and hospital stay without increasing complications or compromising patient safety.