This randomized pilot study evaluated mobilization within 24 hours of cardiac surgery. Early mobilization was safe, with no serious adverse events, and was associated with a shorter duration of postoperative delirium, along with a trend toward lower delirium incidence. While overall delirium rates were not significantly reduced, the findings support…
Read more »This retrospective study evaluated triangular posterior pericardiectomy (TPP) during CABG using phenotypic outcome analysis. TPP was associated with reduced postoperative drainage volumes, lower inflammatory response, absence of pericardial effusion, and no atrial fibrillation during 12‑month follow‑up. These findings suggest that surgical strategies enhancing pericardial drainage may favorably influence postoperative fluid…
Read more »This randomized controlled trial compared chest drain management with (at -20 cmH2O) versus without (at -8 cmH2O) suction after lung resection using a digital system. Avoiding suction (-8 cmH2O) significantly shortened chest tube duration without affecting hospital stay or prolonged air leak rates. Continuous suction was independently associated with delayed…
Read more »This retrospective bicentric study compared VATS pleurodesis with versus without primary indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) placement for recurrent pleural effusions. Combined IPC implantation significantly reduced chest drainage duration and hospital length of stay without increasing complications or operative time. These findings suggest that integrating IPC into surgical pleural management may…
Read more »This prospective multicentre implementation study evaluated the impact of Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery (ERATS) protocol adherence on outcomes in 727 patients undergoing anatomical lung resection. Higher ERATS adherence was significantly associated with shorter length of stay and fewer postoperative complications. These findings support improving compliance with ERATS elements to…
Read more »This multicenter retrospective cohort study evaluated ultrafine pigtail chest tubes after uniportal VATS for lung tumors in 1076 patients. After propensity score matching, two 8 Fr ultrafine chest tubes were associated with lower early postoperative pain, reduced early drainage volume, and fewer complications such as atelectasis and intrathoracic hemorrhage compared…
Read more »This observational study evaluated CheLSEA, an artificial intelligence–based clinical decision support system for chest tube management after pulmonary resection. In 50 patients, CheLSEA generated safe recommendations, with safeguards triggered in 21% of queries for higher-risk findings. Chest tube removal was recommended in 9% of cases, with 83% deemed safe and…
Read more »This quality improvement project evaluated the safety and feasibility of introducing a digital chest drain system in paediatric surgical patients. Retrospective data from 49 patients showed the digital drain was used in older and heavier children and demonstrated a trend toward shorter chest drain duration compared with underwater drainage, without…
Read more »This prospective single-centre study evaluated patient experience with a cardiac enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in 191 patients. Preoperatively, pain was the main concern, and face-to-face discussions were the most valued information source. ERAS was associated with improved prehabilitation behaviors and lower-than-expected postoperative pain, with high satisfaction regarding in-hospital…
Read more »This retrospective cohort study evaluated a modified tunneled intercostal chest tube placement to reduce acute pain after uniportal VATS lobectomy. Among 1082 patients, the modified technique was associated with lower rates of moderate-to-severe pain within 24 hours compared with conventional placement (16.8% vs 27.1%). Adjusted analyses showed a 48% reduction…
Read more »
Disclaimer: The content on this website is provided for educational and informational purposes only to support awareness of research in drainology. Summaries are based on published literature and are not intended to replace the original publications. Drainology assumes no responsibility or liability for the data, analyses, interpretations, conclusions, or opinions presented in the referenced papers. Readers should consult the original articles for complete information.