Background: In this meta-analysis, we conducted a pooled analysis of clinical studies comparing the efficacy of single chest tube versus double chest tube after a lobectomy.
Methods: According to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration, we established a rigorous study protocol. We performed a systematic electronic search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases to identify articles to include in our meta-analysis. A literature search was performed using relevant keywords. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan© software.
Results: Five studies, published between 2003 and 2014, including 630 patients (314 patients with a single chest tube and 316 patients with a double chest tube), met the selection criteria. From the available data, the patients using a single tube demonstrated significantly decreased postoperative pain [weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.60; 95 % confidence intervals [CIs] -0.68-- 0.52; P < 0.00001], duration of drainage [WMD -0.70; 95 % CIs -0.90-- 0.49; P < 0.00001] and hospital stay [WMD -0.51; 95 % CIs -0.91-- 0.12; P = 0.01] compared to patients using a double tube after a pulmonary lobectomy. However, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications [OR 0.91; 95 % CIs 0.57-1.44; P = 0.67] and re-drainage rates [OR 0.81; 95 % CIs 0.42-1.58; P = 0.54].
Conclusion: Our results showed that a single-drain method is effective, reducing postoperative pain, hospitalization times and duration of drainage in patients who undergo a lobectomy. Moreover, the single-drain method does not increase the occurrence of postoperative complications and re-drainage rates.
Keywords: Chest tube; Complications; Drainage; Lobectomy; Pain.