| Literature DB >> 33783956 |
Yeong Jeong Jeon1, Jong Ho Cho1, Dongho Hyun2, Sumin Shin1, Hong Kwan Kim1, Yong Soo Choi1, Jhingook Kim1, Jae Ill Zo1, Young Mog Shim1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of thoracic duct embolization (TDE) on the management of postoperative chyle leakage.Entities:
Keywords: chyle leakage; thoracic duct embolization; thoracic duct ligation
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33783956 PMCID: PMC8088932 DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.13914
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Thorac Cancer ISSN: 1759-7706 Impact factor: 3.500
Baseline characteristics of patients who developed chyle leakage after surgery
| First period( | Second period( |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | (Median, range) | 62 (33–85) | 65 (42–80) | 0.318 |
| Sex | Female | 23 (40.3%) | 12 (25%) | |
| Male | 34 (59.7%) | 36 (76%) | 0.146 | |
| Site | Right | 46 (82.1%) | 43 (91.5%) | 0.276 |
| Left | 10 (17.9%) | 4 (8.5%) | ||
| Approach | Open thoracotomy | 23 (40.4%) | 29 (60.4%) | 0.064 |
| Minimally invasive surgery | 34 (59.6%) | 19 (39.6%) | ||
| Surgery | Lung cancer | 49 (86%) | 30 (62.5%) | 0.011 |
| Esophageal cancer | 8 (14%) | 18 (37.5%) | ||
| Lymph node dissection | Yes | 56 (98.3%) | 48 (100%) | 1.000 |
| No | 1 (1.8%) | 0 | ||
| Treatment | Low‐fat diet | 13 (22.8%) | 9 (18.8%) | |
| NPO ± low‐fat diet | 36 (63.2%) | 26 (54.2%) | ||
| Surgical ligation | 6 (10.5%) | 3 (6.3%) | ||
| Thoracic duct embolization | 0 | 10 (23.8%) | ||
| Hospital stay | (days, mean ± SD) | 19.1 ± 4.5 | 18 ± 13 | 0.346 |
| Time to oral feeding | (days, mean ± SD) | 5.8 ± 7 | 7.3 ± 6.4 | 0.253 |
| Peak drainage amount | (cc/day, mean ± SD) | 683.3 ± 489.4 | 784.1 ± 653.5 | 0.369 |
Abbreviations: NPO, nil per os (nothing by mouth); SD, standard deviation.
FIGURE 1Management of patients with chyle leakage
Treatment and outcomes of patients who underwent lung cancer surgery
| First period( | Second period( |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Low‐fat diet | 12 (24.5%) | 6 (20%) | |
| NPO ± low‐fat diet | 33 (67.4%) | 18 (60%) | ||
| Surgical ligation | 2 (4.1%) | 1 (3.3%) | ||
| Thoracic duct embolization | 0 | 5 (16.7%) | ||
| Hospital stay | (days, mean ± SD) | 16.3 ± 9.7 | 12.6 ± 4.6 | 0.026 |
| Time to oral feeding | (days, mean ± SD) | 5 ± 4.5 | 4.8 ± 3.1 | 0.837 |
| Peak drainage amount | (cc/day, mean ± SD) | 565.2 ± 303.3 | 575.8 ± 454.9 | 0.901 |
Abbreviations: NPO, nil per os (nothing by mouth); SD, standard deviation.
Treatment and outcomes of patients who underwent esophageal cancer surgery
| First period( | Second period( |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Low‐fat diet | 1 (12.5%) | 3 (16.7%) | |
| NPO ± low‐fat diet | 3 (37.5%) | 8 (44.4%) | ||
| Surgical ligation | 4 (50%) | 2 (11.1%) | ||
| Thoracic duct embolization | 0 | 5 (27.8%) | ||
| Hospital stay | (days, mean ± SD) | 35.9 ± 25.9 | 26.8 ± 17.3 | 0.302 |
| Time to oral feeding | (days, mean ± SD) | 17.3 ± 9.1 | 12.8 ± 6.1 | 0.166 |
| Peak drainage amount | (cc/day, mean ± SD) | 1406.8 ± 768.1 | 1131.2 ± 789.7 | 0.416 |
Abbreviations: NPO, nil per os (nothing by mouth); SD, standard deviation.
FIGURE 2Outcomes of thoracic duct embolization