A prospective randomized controlled trial of suction versus non-suction to the under-water seal drains following lung resection.

OBJECTIVE

Practice varies as to whether or not suction is applied to under-water seal drains following lung surgery. We tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference with respect to air leak duration.

METHODS

Patients undergoing thoracotomy or video assisted thoracoscopic surgery for lobectomy or wedge resection had either low-pressure suction or no suction applied to their underwater seal bottles postoperatively. Patients were allocated using minimization, a method of unbiased allocation ensuring balance between the arms of a trial with respect to known or suspected confounding factors. The trial was powered for duration of air leak. If an air leak persisted on the 7th post-operative day, the surgeon determined further management. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of air leak duration and a log rank test were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, with observations censored at 144h (6 complete days).

RESULTS

Of the 254 patients that entered the trial, data were available for analysis for 239 (123 no-suction and 116 suction). There was no significant difference in the cumulative persistence of air leaks between the two groups (P=0.62) and inspection of the Kaplan-Meier curves suggests that any difference is negligible.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying suction to the underwater seal drains following lung surgery makes no difference in terms of air leak duration. In the light of this finding we have adopted a uniform policy of no suction being applied to the underwater seal, from the time of surgery, unless a specific clinical judgment is made to use it. The anticipated gains are that this will reduce work and cost and aid mobilization.