Liying Zhou1,2,3, Kangle Guo1,2,3, Xue Shang1,2,3, Fenfen E1,2,3, Meng Xu1,2,3, Yanan Wu1,2,3, Kehu Yang4,5,6, Xiuxia Li7,8,9. 1. Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, 199 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou, 730000, China. 2. Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, 199 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou, 730000, China. 3. Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, 730000, China. 4. Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, 199 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou, 730000, China. yangkh-ebm@lzu.edu.cn. 5. Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, 199 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou, 730000, China. yangkh-ebm@lzu.edu.cn. 6. Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, 730000, China. yangkh-ebm@lzu.edu.cn. 7. Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, 199 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou, 730000, China. lixiuxia@lzu.edu.cn. 8. Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, 199 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou, 730000, China. lixiuxia@lzu.edu.cn. 9. Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, 730000, China. lixiuxia@lzu.edu.cn.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the value of the chest digital drainage system for the postoperative management of patients who have undergone pulmonary resection. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of digital drainage systems versus the analog drainage system for patients with lung disease after pulmonary resection. Dichotomous variables were evaluated using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and mean and standardized mean differences (MDs and SMDs, respectively) with 95% CIs were used to calculate continuous variables. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata and RevMan software. RESULTS: In total, 12 RCTs involving 2000 patients were analyzed. Significant differences in duration of chest tube placement (SMD = -0.49; 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.20), length of hospital stay (MD =-0.79 days; 95% CI = -1.24 to -0.34), and number of chest tube clamping tests (RR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36-1.49) were observed between the two groups, which did not significant differ in the occurrence of prolonged air leak or cardiopulmonary complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: The digital chest drainage system is mainly advantageous in the duration of chest tube placement, length of hospital stay, and number of chest tube clamping tests. Future research should evaluate the requirements and economic impact of using digital system in routine clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the value of the chest digital drainage system for the postoperative management of patients who have undergone pulmonary resection. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of digital drainage systems versus the analog drainage system for patients with lung disease after pulmonary resection. Dichotomous variables were evaluated using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and mean and standardized mean differences (MDs and SMDs, respectively) with 95% CIs were used to calculate continuous variables. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata and RevMan software. RESULTS: In total, 12 RCTs involving 2000 patients were analyzed. Significant differences in duration of chest tube placement (SMD = -0.49; 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.20), length of hospital stay (MD =-0.79 days; 95% CI = -1.24 to -0.34), and number of chest tube clamping tests (RR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36-1.49) were observed between the two groups, which did not significant differ in the occurrence of prolonged air leak or cardiopulmonary complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: The digital chest drainage system is mainly advantageous in the duration of chest tube placement, length of hospital stay, and number of chest tube clamping tests. Future research should evaluate the requirements and economic impact of using digital system in routine clinical practice.