This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Sandro Mattioli Richard G. Berrisford Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mattioli, S. Articles by Aramini, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mattioli, S. Articles by Aramini, B. Related Collections Related Article

Survey on chest drainage systems adopted in Europe

^a Division of Oesophageal and Pulmonary Surgery, University of Bologna, Villa Maria Cecilia e San Pier Damiano Hospitals, Cotignola and Faenza (Ravenna), Italy
^b Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK

Corresponding author. Università degli Studi di Bologna – Dipartimento di Chirurgia Generale e dei Trapianti d'Organo- Via Massarenti 9 – 40138 Bologna, Italy. Tel.: +39 051 6364870; fax: +39 051 347431.

E-mail address: sandro.mattioli{at}unibo.it (S. Mattioli).

The aim of this survey, promoted by the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons, was to acquire information and advice from ‘the field’ in order to promote development of technology for thoracic surgery and to provide information for future guidelines on chest drainage. Society members were offered a questionnaire on the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons website (November 2006) composed of seven sections comprehending 21 detailed items. The questionnaire was completed by 120 centres, 100% performed lung surgery, 91.6% mediastinal surgery, 54.1% oesophageal surgery, 10% cardiothoracic surgery. The PVC straight drain (mean 55.9%) and silicon drain (mean 38.4%), water-valve/water suction disposable chest drainage collection system (mean 43.4%), one bottle (mean 24.8%), and two bottles with suction control (mean 18.2%), were the most frequently used. After pneumonectomy 51.2% used a balanced drainage system, 9% periodical thoracocentesis, 39.8% others. In 57.5–92% drainage suction was stopped 4 postoperative days and in 8–42.5% >4 postoperative days. In 17.6–60.7% drains were removed 4 postoperative days and in 39.3–82.4% >4 postoperative days. The survey demonstrates a trend toward the use of updated technical devices, high consideration of the costs, and clinical practice based on personal preferences.

Key Words: Thoracic surgery; Chest drainage systems; Chest; Lung; Mediastinum; Oesophagus

Related Article

eComment: A tribute to Gotthard Bülau and Vincenzo Monaldi

Karsten Knobloch
Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery 2008 7: 1159. [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Knobloch eComment: A tribute to Gotthard Bulau and Vincenzo Monaldi Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, December 1, 2008; 7(6): 1159 - 1159. [Full Text] [PDF]