BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate videothoracoscopic procedures in the setting of chest trauma. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed our experience of videothoracoscopy in patients with either blunt trauma or penetrating thoracic injuries. RESULTS: Forty-three procedures involving 42 patients were performed between July 1990 and April 1996. Indications for videothoracoscopy included suspected diaphragmatic injury (14 patients), clotted hemothorax (12), continued hemothorax (6), persistent pneumothorax (5), intrathoracic foreign body (4), posttraumatic chylothorax (1), and posttraumatic empyema (1 patient). Ten patients (24%) required conversion to thoracotomy. Two patients suffered postoperative pneumonia. There was one perioperative death. Mean hospital stay was 17 days; 21 days for patients with blunt trauma and 13 days for patients with penetrating injuries. There was no procedure-related complication. Videothoracoscopy allowed precocious discharge of patients suffering penetrating injuries and allowed faster recovery in the majority of patients suffering severe blunt trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Videothoracoscopy appears to be a safe, accurate, and useful approach in selected patients with chest trauma. It is ideal for the assessment of diaphragmatic injuries, for control of chest wall bleeding, for early removal of clotted hemothorax, for treatment of empyema, for treatment of chylothorax, for treatment of persistent pneumothorax, and for removal of intrathoracic foreign body. However, we do not recommend the use of this technique in the setting of suspected great vessel or cardiac injury.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate videothoracoscopic procedures in the setting of chest trauma. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed our experience of videothoracoscopy in patients with either blunt trauma or penetrating thoracic injuries. RESULTS: Forty-three procedures involving 42 patients were performed between July 1990 and April 1996. Indications for videothoracoscopy included suspected diaphragmatic injury (14 patients), clotted hemothorax (12), continued hemothorax (6), persistent pneumothorax (5), intrathoracic foreign body (4), posttraumatic chylothorax (1), and posttraumatic empyema (1 patient). Ten patients (24%) required conversion to thoracotomy. Two patients suffered postoperative pneumonia. There was one perioperative death. Mean hospital stay was 17 days; 21 days for patients with blunt trauma and 13 days for patients with penetrating injuries. There was no procedure-related complication. Videothoracoscopy allowed precocious discharge of patients suffering penetrating injuries and allowed faster recovery in the majority of patients suffering severe blunt trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Videothoracoscopy appears to be a safe, accurate, and useful approach in selected patients with chest trauma. It is ideal for the assessment of diaphragmatic injuries, for control of chest wall bleeding, for early removal of clotted hemothorax, for treatment of empyema, for treatment of chylothorax, for treatment of persistent pneumothorax, and for removal of intrathoracic foreign body. However, we do not recommend the use of this technique in the setting of suspected great vessel or cardiac injury.