Bronchial suction does not facilitate lung collapse when using a double-lumen tube during video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Recommendations and considerations for speeding the collapse of the non-ventilated lung during single-lung ventilation in thoracoscopic surgery: a literature review

Video-assisted thoracoscopic thoracic surgery has the advantages of less physical damage, less postoperative pain, and a rapid recovery. Therefore, it is widely used in the clinic. The quality of nonventilated lung collapse is the key point of thoracoscopic surgery. Poor lung collapse on the operative side damages surgical exposure and prolongs the process of surgery. Therefore, it is important to achieve good lung collapse as soon as possible after opening the pleura. Over the past two decades, there have been reports of advances in research on the physiological mechanism of lung collapse and several kinds of techniques for speeding up lung collapse. This review will inform the advances of each technique, make recommendations for reasonable implementation and discuss their controversies and considerations.

Combined use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and a bronchial blocker vs. a double-lumen endobronchial tube in thoracoscopic surgery: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The combined use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and a bronchial blocker may reduce postoperative hoarseness and sore throat. We aimed to test the feasibility and efficacy of this combination technique in thoracoscopic surgery.

DESIGN

A single-center, patient-assessor blinded, randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Nagoya City University Hospital (between November 2020 and April 2022).

PATIENTS

A total of 100 adult patients undergoing lobectomy or segmentectomy by video- or robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to either group using a combination of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and a bronchial blocker (pLMA+BB group) or a double-lumen endobronchial tube (DLT group).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the hoarseness incidence on 1-3 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes included sore throat, intraoperative complications (hypoxemia, hypercapnia, surgical interruption, malposition of devices, unintended lung expansion, and ventilatory difficulty), lung collapse, device placement-related outcomes, and coughing during emergence.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 100 patients underwent randomization (51 to the pLMA+BB group and 49 to the DLT group). After drop outs, a total of 49 patients in each group were analyzed per-protocol. The incidences of hoarseness in the pLMA+BB and DLT groups were 42.9% and 53.1% (difference, -10.2%; 95% confidence interval, -30.1% to 10.3%; p = 0.419), 18.4% vs. 32.7%, and 20.4% vs. 24.5% on postoperative day 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The incidences of sore throat in the pLMA+BB and DLT groups were 16.3% vs. 34.7% (difference, -18.4%; 95% confidence interval, -35.9% to -0.9%; p = 0.063) on postoperative day 1. In the pLMA+BB group, more intraoperative complications and less coughing during emergence were observed compared to the DLT group. Lung collapse and placement-related outcomes were comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and bronchial blocker did not significantly reduce hoarseness compared to the double-lumen endobronchial tube.

A comparison between bronchial blockers and double-lumen tubes for patients undergoing lung resection: A propensity score-matched cohort study

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the effect of bronchial blockers (BB) and double-lumen tubes (DLT) on patients' postoperative recovery after lung resection. Method: 4,636 patients undergoing lung resection and receiving either BB or DLT intubation were reviewed and matched using the propensity score matching method. The primary outcome was the surgical duration. The secondary outcomes included diagnostic results of postoperative chest X-ray, postoperative oxygenation index, incidence of hypercapnia, hypoxemia and sore throat, chest tube duration, incidence of ICU admission, length of hospital stay and incidence of the 30-day readmission. Results: After matching, 401 patients receiving BB were matched to 3,439 patients receiving DLT. There was no statistical difference on the surgical duration between the two groups (P>0.05). However, compared with the DLT group, patients in the BB group showed more infiltrate especially at the surgery side (14.96% versus 9.07%, P<0.001) based on the chest X-ray, together with higher incidence of ICU admission (5.23% versus 2.61%, P<0.05). Additionally, no statistical differences were found between the two groups about chest tube duration, oxygenation index, incidence of hypercapnia, hypoxemia and sore throat, duration of surgery, hospital stays and 30-day readmission (P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with the DLT, patients receiving BB technique tend to have increased pulmonary infiltrate (especially the surgery side) and higher incidence of ICU admission at the early post-operative stage, which may have an influence on the patients' recovery.

Non-ventilated lung deflation during one-lung ventilation with a double-lumen endotracheal tube: a randomized-controlled trial of occluding the non-ventilated endobronchial lumen before pleural opening

PURPOSE

Lung deflation during one-lung ventilation (OLV) is thought to be faster using a double-lumen endotracheal tube (DL-ETT) than with a bronchial blocker, especially when the non-ventilated lumen is opened to allow egress of air from the operative lung. Nevertheless, ambient air can also be entrained into the non-ventilated lumen before pleural opening and subsequently delay deflation. We therefore hypothesized that occluding the non-ventilated DL-ETT lumen during OLV before pleural opening would prevent air entrainment and consequently enhance operative lung deflation during video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).

METHODS

Thirty patients undergoing VATS using DL-ETT to allow OLV were randomized to having the lumen of the operative lung either open (control group) or occluded (intervention group) to ambient air. The primary outcome was the time to lung collapse evaluated intraoperatively by the surgeons. The T50, an index of rate of deflation, was also determined from a probabilistic model derived from intraoperative video clips presented in random order to three observers.

RESULTS

The median [interquartile range] time to lung deflation occurred faster in the intervention group than in the control group (24 [20-37] min vs 54 [48-68] min, respectively; median difference, 30 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], 14 to 46; P < 0.001). The estimated T50 was 32.6 min in the intervention group compared with 62.3 min in the control group (difference, - 29.7 min; 95% CI, - 51.1 to - 8.4; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Operative lung deflation during OLV with a DL-ETT is faster when the operative lumen remains closed before pleural opening thus preventing it from entraining ambient air during the closed chest phase of OLV.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03508050); registered 27 September 2017.

The disconnection technique with the use of a bronchial blocker for improving nonventilated lung collapse in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Preemptive one lung ventilation enhances lung collapse during thoracoscopic surgery: A randomized controlled trial

In routine practice, one lung ventilation (OLV) is initiated upon pleural opening. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare lung collapse after preemptive OLV versus conventional OLV in thoracoscopic surgery. A total of 67 patients were enrolled (34 with conventional OLV; 33 with preemptive OLV). Preemptive OLV was conducted by closing the DLT lumen to the non‐ventilated lung immediately upon assuming the lateral position with the distal port closed to the atmosphere until pleural opening (>6 minutes in all cases). Lung collapse was assessed at 1, 5, 10, 20, 30 and 40 minutes after pleural opening using a 10‐point rating scale (10: complete collapse). The primary end point was the duration from pleural opening to satisfactory lung collapse (score of 8). Secondary end points included PaO₂ and hypoxemia. The duration from pleural opening to satisfactory lung collapse was shorter in the preemptive OLV group (9.1 ± 1.2 vs. 14.1 ± 4.7 minutes, P < 0.01). PaO₂ was comparable between the two groups prior to anesthetic induction (T0), and 20 (T2), 40 minutes (T3) after pleural incision, but was lower in the preemptive OLV group at zero minutes after pleural incision (T1) (457.5 ± 19.0 vs. 483.1 ± 18.1 mmHg, P < 0.01). No patients in either group developed hypoxemia. In summary, preemptive OLV expedites lung collapse during thoracoscopic surgery with minimal safety concern.