Less pain, faster recovery: evaluating 8Fr vs. 22Fr chest tubes in thoracoscopic lung cancer resection

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to compare and analyze the clinical data differences between the use of a single ultra-fine 8Fr chest drainage tube and a single 22Fr conventional chest drainage tube, both commonly employed after single-port thoracoscopic lung cancer resection. This comparison aims to evaluate the overall postoperative effectiveness of each method. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 697 patients undergoing this procedure over two years. After exclusions, 665 patients were categorized: Group A (8Fr tube) and Group B (22Fr tube). Propensity score matching (PSM) was then applied to eliminate confounding factors between the two groups. After PSM, 202 pairs (404 patients) were included in both groups. Outcomes compared included postoperative hospital stay, total drainage volume, pain scores (days 1-3), inflammatory markers, complications, Chronic Postsurgical Pain (CPSP), and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Group A had significantly lower pain scores on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3 (all P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (3 [3, 4] vs. 4 [3, 4] days, P = 0.032), and less total drainage volume (180 [130-236.25] ml vs. 255 [170-330] ml, P < 0.001) than Group B. Complication rates and inflammatory markers showed no significant differences (P > 0.05). At one month, Group A reported significantly lower worst/average pain scores (P < 0.001, P = 0.018) and better QOL in activities, mood, work, relationships, and enjoyment (all P < 0.05) compared to Group B. No significant differences existed in mildest pain or walking impact (P > 0.05) or in any pain/QOL measures at 3 months (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to 22Fr tubes, using an 8Fr ultra-fine drain after thoracoscopic lung cancer resection significantly reduces postoperative pain, drainage duration, hospital stay, and total drainage volume. Patients discharged with the 8Fr tube experienced less severe pain and better short-term QOL without increased complications or inflammation. The 8Fr ultra-fine drain is an effective, safe, and clinically valuable alternative.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
Published
2026-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-026-03978-1
Primary Topic
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Less pain, faster recovery: evaluating 8Fr vs. 22Fr chest tubes in thoracoscopic lung cancer resection

Di Qi, Jiale Hu, Yubin Shang, Yu Sun et al.
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Less pain, faster recovery: evaluating 8Fr vs. 22Fr chest tubes in thoracoscopic lung cancer resection

Di Qi, Jiale Hu, Yubin Shang, Yu Sun, Pengcheng Qiu, Bo Huang, Bingdi Wei
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to compare and analyze the clinical data differences between the use of a single ultra-fine 8Fr chest drainage tube and a single 22Fr conventional chest drainage tube, both commonly employed after single-port thoracoscopic lung cancer resection. This comparison aims to evaluate the overall postoperative effectiveness of each method. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 697 patients undergoing this procedure over two years. After exclusions, 665 patients were categorized: Group A (8Fr tube) and Group B (22Fr tube). Propensity score matching (PSM) was then applied to eliminate confounding factors between the two groups. After PSM, 202 pairs (404 patients) were included in both groups. Outcomes compared included postoperative hospital stay, total drainage volume, pain scores (days 1-3), inflammatory markers, complications, Chronic Postsurgical Pain (CPSP), and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Group A had significantly lower pain scores on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3 (all P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (3 [3, 4] vs. 4 [3, 4] days, P = 0.032), and less total drainage volume (180 [130-236.25] ml vs. 255 [170-330] ml, P < 0.001) than Group B. Complication rates and inflammatory markers showed no significant differences (P > 0.05). At one month, Group A reported significantly lower worst/average pain scores (P < 0.001, P = 0.018) and better QOL in activities, mood, work, relationships, and enjoyment (all P < 0.05) compared to Group B. No significant differences existed in mildest pain or walking impact (P > 0.05) or in any pain/QOL measures at 3 months (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to 22Fr tubes, using an 8Fr ultra-fine drain after thoracoscopic lung cancer resection significantly reduces postoperative pain, drainage duration, hospital stay, and total drainage volume. Patients discharged with the 8Fr tube experienced less severe pain and better short-term QOL without increased complications or inflammation. The 8Fr ultra-fine drain is an effective, safe, and clinically valuable alternative.

Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
First People’s Hospital of Jingmen (CN), Yingkou Institute of Technology (CN), Gansu Provincial Hospital (CN), Jinzhou Medical University (CN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.