Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38883637›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024

Clinical outcomes and staff satisfaction after adoption of digital chest drainage system for minimally invasive lung resections.

Benjamin A Palleiko, Anupama Singh, Christopher Strader, Tanmay Patil, Allison Crawford, Isabel Emmerick, Feiran Lou, Karl Uy, Mark W Maxfield

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Benjamin A PalleikoSchool of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8374-1549
Anupama SinghDepartment of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Christopher StraderDepartment of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Tanmay PatilSchool of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Allison CrawfordDepartment of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Isabel EmmerickDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Feiran LouDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Karl UyDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Mark W MaxfieldDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Digital chest drainage systems (DCDS) provide reliable pleural drainage while quantifying fluid output and air leak. However, the benefits of DCDS in the contemporary era of minimally invasive thoracic surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have not been fully investigated. Additionally, hospital and resident staff experiences after implementation of a DCDS have not been fully explored. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and hospital staff experience after adoption of a DCDS for minimally invasive lung resections. Methods: A single-center retrospective review of patients who underwent minimally invasive lung resection (lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection) and received a DCDS from 11/1/2021 to 11/1/2022. DCDS patients were compared to sequential historical controls (3/1/2019-6/30/2021) who received a analog chest drainage system. For the analog system, chest tubes were removed when no bubbles were observed in the water seal compartment with Valsalva, cough, and in variable positions. With a DCDS, chest tubes were removed when the air leak was less than 30 cc/min for 8 hours, with no spikes. All patients followed an institutional ERAS protocol. Primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and chest tube duration. Hospital staff and residents were surveyed regarding their experience. Results: One hundred and twenty-four patients received DCDS, and 248 received an analog chest drainage system. There was a reduction in mean LOS (3.6 Conclusions: Using a DCDS can reduce LOS and chest tube duration in the contemporary setting of minimally invasive lung resections and ERAS protocols. Increased confidence of resident decision-making for chest tube removal may contribute to improved outcomes.

Indexed as

chest drainminimally invasive lung resectionoutcomesThoracic

Identifiers

PMID38883637
PMCPMC11170378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.