Literature DB >> 23575759

A randomized trial of early versus delayed mediastinal drain removal after cardiac surgery using silastic and conventional tubes.

Emmanuel Moss1, Corey S Miller, Henrik Jensen, Arsène Basmadjian, Denis Bouchard, Michel Carrier, Louis P Perrault, Raymond Cartier, Michel Pellerin, Philippe Demers.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Mediastinal drainage following cardiac surgery with traditional large-bore plastic tubes can be painful and cumbersome. This study was designed to determine whether prolonged drainage (5 days) with a silastic tube decreased the incidence of significant pericardial effusion and tamponade following aortic or valvular surgery.
METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients undergoing valvular or aortic surgery in a tertiary cardiac surgery institution were randomized to receive a conventional mediastinal tube plus a silastic Blake drain (n = 75), or two conventional tubes (n = 75). Conventional drains were removed on postoperative day (POD) 1, while Blake drains were removed on POD 5. The primary end-point was the combined incidence of significant pericardial effusion (≥ 15 mm) or tamponade through POD 5. Secondary end-points included total mediastinal drainage, postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) and pain.
RESULTS: Analysis was performed for 67 patients in the Blake group and 73 in the conventional group. There was no difference between the two groups in the combined end-point of significant effusion or tamponade (7.4 vs 8.3%, P = 0.74), or in the incidence of AF (47 vs 46%, P = 0.89). Mean 24-h drainage was greater in the Blake group than in the conventional group (749 ± 444 ml vs 645 ± 618 ml, P < 0.01). Overall incidence of significant pericardial effusion at 30 days was 12.1% (n = 17), with 5% (n = 7) requiring drainage. The Blake group had a numerically lower incidence of effusion requiring drainage at POD 30 (3.0 vs 6.8%, P = 0.44). Postoperative pain was similar between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing ascending aortic or valvular surgery, prolonged drainage with silastic tubes is safe and does not increase postoperative pain. There was no difference between the Blake and conventional drains with regard to significant pericardial effusion or tamponade in this cohort; however, this conclusion is limited by the low overall incidence of the primary outcome in this cohort.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23575759      PMCID: PMC3686392          DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivt123

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg        ISSN: 1569-9285


  12 in total

1.  A method for mediastinal drainage after cardiac procedures using small silastic drains.

Authors:  J A Obney; M J Barnes; P G Lisagor; D J Cohen
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.330

2.  Less pain with flexible fluted silicone chest drains than with conventional rigid chest tubes after cardiac surgery.

Authors:  Enoch Akowuah; Eu Chin Ho; Rina George; Karl Brennan; Sue Tennant; Peter Braidley; Graham Cooper
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  The incidence of significant pericardial effusion and tamponade following major aortic root surgery.

Authors:  A M Alkhulaifi; M E Speechly-Dick; R H Swanton; C W Pattison; W B Pugsley
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 1.888

4.  Effect of posterior pericardial drainage on the incidence of pericardial effusion after ascending aortic surgery.

Authors:  Sadik Eryilmaz; Ozan Emiroglu; Zeynep Eyileten; Ruchan Akar; Levent Yazicioglu; Refik Tasoz; Bulent Kaya; Adnan Uysalel; Kemalettin Ucanok; Tumer Corapcioglu; Umit Ozyurda
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.209

5.  Efficacy of Blake drains for mediastinal and pleural drainage following cardiac operations.

Authors:  Andreas G Sakopoulos; Andrew S Hurwitz; Richard W Suda; John N Goodwin
Journal:  J Card Surg       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.620

6.  Postoperative cardiac tamponade in the modern surgical era.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Kuvin; Nibal A Harati; Natesa G Pandian; Robert M Bojar; Kamal R Khabbaz
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.330

7.  The importance of intrapericardial drain selection in cardiac surgery.

Authors:  Turan Ege; Ersan Tatli; Suat Canbaz; Mustafa Cikirikcioglu; Hasan Sunar; Bilhan Ozalp; Enver Duran
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 9.410

8.  Comparison of three different chest drainages after coronary artery bypass surgery--a randomised trial in 150 patients.

Authors:  Staffan Bjessmo; Susanne Hylander; Jenny Vedin; Dag Mohlkert; Torbjörn Ivert
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 4.191

9.  The role of anticoagulation in the development of pericardial effusion and late tamponade after cardiac surgery.

Authors:  J F Malouf; S Alam; W Gharzeddine; M A Stefadouros
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  Silastic drains vs conventional chest tubes after coronary artery bypass.

Authors:  Timothy L Frankel; Peter C Hill; Sotiris C Stamou; Robert C Lowery; Albert J Pfister; Arvind Jain; Paul J Corso
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 9.410

View more
  3 in total

1.  Does more than a single chest tube for mediastinal drainage affect outcomes after cardiac surgery?

Authors:  Jeffrey Le; Karen J Buth; Gregory M Hirsch; Jean-Francois Légaré
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.089

2.  Method of bilateral pleural drainage by single Blake drain after esophagectomy.

Authors:  Yukiko Niwa; Masahiko Koike; Hisaharu Oya; Naoki Iwata; Daisuke Kobayashi; Mitsuro Kanda; Chie Tanaka; Suguru Yamada; Tsutomu Fujii; Goro Nakayama; Hiroyuki Sugimoto; Shuji Nomoto; Michitaka Fujiwara; Yasuhiro Kodera
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Comparison consequences of Jackson-Pratt drain versus chest tube after coronary artery bypass grafting: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Mohsen Mirmohammad-Sadeghi; Pejman Pourazari; Mojtaba Akbari
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2017-12-26       Impact factor: 1.852

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.