Late video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracostomy tube reinsertion for retained hemothorax after penetrating trauma, a prospective randomized control study.

BACKGROUND

Early video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is the recommended treatment of choice for retained hemothorax (RH). A prospective single-center randomized control study was conducted to compare outcomes between VATS and thoracostomy tube (TT) reinsertion for patients with RH after penetrating trauma in a resource constrained unit. Our hypothesis was that patients with a RH receiving VATS instead of TT reinsertion would have a shorter hospital stay and lesser complications.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

From January 2014 to November 2019, stable patients with thoracic penetrating trauma complicated with retained hemothoraces were randomized to either VATS or TT reinsertion. The outcomes were length of hospital stay (LOS) and complications.

RESULTS

Out of the 77 patients assessed for eligibility, 65 patients were randomized and 62 analyzed: 30 in the VATS arm and 32 in the TT reinsertion arm. Demographics and mechanisms of injury were comparable between the two arms. Length of hospital stay was: preprocedure: VATS 6.8 (+/-2.8) days and TT 6.6 (+/- 2.4) days (p = 0.932) and postprocedure: VATS 5.1 (+/-2.3) days, TT 7.1 (+/-6.3) days (p = 0.459), total LOS VATS 12 (+/- 3.9) days, and TT 14.4 (+/-7) days (p = 0.224). The TT arm had 15 complications compared to the VATS arm of four (p = 0.004). There were two additional procedures in the VATS arm and 10 in the TT arm (p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

VATS proved to be the better treatment modality for RH with fewer complications and less need of additional procedures, while the LOS between the two groups was not statistically different.