ArticleJournal of chest surgery2026
A 19F Blake Drain versus a 28F Conventional Drain Following Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Comparative Retrospective Study.
Article in Journal of chest surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Commentary: As the Techniques of Esophagectomy Evolve, So Does the Drain.Journal of chest surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pleural drainage is essential for preventing and managing respiratory complications after video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (VATE). Conventional large-bore drains often cause significant pain. Small-bore drains (e.g., 19F Blake drains) may reduce discomfort; however, evidence regarding their use in VATE is limited. This study compared drainage effectiveness and pain between 19F Blake drains and conventional 28F drains after VATE for esophageal cancer. Methods: This retrospective study included 77 male patients with middle- or lower-third esophageal cancer who underwent VATE with laparoscopic retrosternal tunneling from November 2018 to November 2022. Fifty-five patients received a 28F conventional drain, and 22 received a 19F Blake drain. Outcomes included drainage duration and volume, pain levels (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]), postoperative pneumonia rates, and pulmonary function (forced vital capacity [FVC], forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]) on postoperative day 3. Results: The 19F group reported significantly lower pain scores on postoperative days 1-3 (VAS: 2.95-3.25 vs. 4.07-4.62, p<0.001). Drainage duration and pneumonia rates were similar between groups. The 19F group demonstrated a trend toward higher drainage volume and significantly better preservation of pulmonary function, with smaller declines in FVC (ΔFVC: 0.24±0.20 L vs. 0.63±0.17 L, p<0.001) and FEV1 (ΔFEV1: 0.38±0.25 L vs. 0.58±0.25 L, p=0.02). Conclusion: 19F Blake drains provide similar drainage effectiveness to that of 28F drains, with reduced postoperative pain and better pulmonary function preservation. These findings support the use of 19F Blake drains to improve patient comfort and recovery following VATE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.