Improvement of efficacy,pain,and hospital stay with 16-Fr and 28-Fr drainage tubes in thoracoscopic radical surgery for lung cancer

Lu Minglei; Zhang Shimin; Shen Lanmei

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-3245.2023.06.009

Abstract：Objective To investigate the improvement of efficacy,pain,and hospital stay with 16-Fr and 28-Fr drainage tubes in thoracoscopic radical surgery for lung cancer.Methods A total of 86 patients who underwent thoracoscopic radical surgery for lung cancer from August 2020 to July 2022 were included.The patients were divided into an observation group(16-Fr drainage tube)and a conventional group(28-Fr drainage tube)based on the type of postoperative drainage tube placement.The study aimed to explore the improvement of efficacy,pain,and hospital stay with 16-Fr and 28-Fr drainage tubes.Results The effective rate in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the conventional group(93.02%vs.48.84%),with a statistically significant difference(χ2=20.358,P<0.050).The observation group showed a lower amount of postoperative bleeding(110.22±4.69)ml,shorter drainage tube removal time(3.19±0.85)days,and shorter postoperative hospital stay(8.96±1.12)days compared to the conventional group(t=20.433,6.83,7.011,P=0.000).The VAS pain scores on the first and seventh days postoperatively were significantly lower in the observation group than in the conventional group(P=0.000).The incidence of complications such as lung atelectasis and arrhythmias in the observation group(27.91%)was significantly higher than that in the conventional group(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative quality of life between the two groups(P=0.086).Conclusion The 16-Fr drainage tube is a preferable choice for postoperative thoracoscopic radical surgery,as it improves efficacy,reduces pain,and shortens hospital stay.However,it is associated with a relatively higher incidence of complications.On the other hand,the 28-Fr drainage tube has a lower incidence of complications.The selection between the two tube sizes should be based on the objective condition of the patient in clinical practice.