Skip to main content
Log in

Clinical efficacy of digital chest drainage system in cardiac valve surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript



The portable digitalized suction was used widely in thoracic surgery. The aim of the study was to access the early outcomes of using the portable digitalized suction system after cardiac surgery.


We invested 80 patients including 30 women (mean age 72.7 ± 9.2 years) who underwent cardiac surgery at our hospital, excluded coronary artery bypass grafting only, with or only aortic surgery, emergency operation, and patients with hemodialysis. Patients were categorized as those treated with digital chest drainage system (DCS group, n = 38) or analog chest drainage system (ACS group, n = 42), and the following data were analyzed in two groups. The primary endpoint was the duration of chest drainage, and the secondary endpoints were the rate of drainage-related complications and the length of hospitalization.


The duration of drainage was significantly shorter in the DCS group (ACS vs. DCS = 94.8 ± 31.5 vs. 81.1 ± 20.6 h, p = 0.036). The duration needed for rehabilitation completion was significantly shorter in the DCS group (ACS vs. DCS = 10.7 ± 1.2 vs. 9.6 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.047), and the length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the DCS group (ACS vs. DCS = 21.9 ± 5.3 vs. 18.8 ± 7.2 days, p = 0.031).


This study provided evidence that DCS might be effective for patients who underwent cardiac valve surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Baringer K, Talbert S. Chest drainage systems and management of air leaks after a pulmonary resection. J Thorac Dis. 2017;9:5399–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Satoh Y. Management of chest drainage tubes after lung surgery. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;64:305–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cerfolio RJ, Varela G, Brunelli A. Digital and smart chest drainage systems to monitor air leaks: the birth of a new era? Thorac Surg Clin. 2010;20:413–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee YY, Hsu PK, Huang CS, Wu YC, Hsu HS. Complications after chest tube removal and reinterventions in patients with digital drainage systems. J Clin Med. 2019;8:2092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Linden A, Hecker F, Courvoisier DS, Arsalan M, Köhne J, Brei C, et al. Reduction of drainage-associated complications in cardiac surgery with a digital drainage system: a randomized controlled trial. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11:5177–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barozzi L, Biagio LS, Meneguzzi M, Courvoisier DS, Walpoth BH, Faggian G. Novel, digital, chest drainage system in cardiac surgery. J Card Surg. 2020;35:1492–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Saha S, Hofmann S, Jebran AF, Waezi N, Kutschka I, Friedrich MG, et al. Safety and efficacy of digital chest drainage units compared to conventional chest drainage units in cardiac surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2020;31:42–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Payen JB, Bru O, Bosson JL, Lagrasta A, Novel E, Deschaux I, et al. Assessing pain in critically ill sedated patients by using a behavioral pain scale. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:2258–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kroeze VJ, Lam KY, van Straten AHM, Houterman S, Soliman-Hamad MA. Benefits of endoscopic vein harvesting in coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019;108:1793–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lijkendijk M, Licht PB, Neckelmann K. Electronic versus traditional chest tube drainage following lobectomy: a randomized trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;48:893–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brunelli A, Salati M, Refai M, Di Nunzio L, Xiumé F, Sabbatini A. Evaluation of a new chest tube removal protocol using digital air leak monitoring after lobectomy: a prospective randomised trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2010;37:56–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS. The benefits of continuous and digital air leak assessment after elective pulmonary resection: a prospective study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86:396–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pompili C, Detterbeck F, Papagiannopoulos K, Sihoe A, Vachlas K, Maxfield MW, et al. Multicenter international randomized comparison of objective and subjective outcomes between electronic and traditional chest drainage systems. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;98:490–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Filosso PL, Ruffini E, Solidoro P, Molinatti M, Bruna MC, Oliaro A. Digital air leak monitoring after lobectomy for primary lung cancer in patients with moderate COPD: can a fast-tracking algorithm reduce postoperative costs and complications? J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2010;51:429–33.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Jablonski S, Brocki M, Wawrzycki M, Smigielski JA, Kozakiewicz M. Efficacy assessment of the drainage with permanent airflow measurement in the treatment of pneumothorax with air leak. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;62:509–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rathinam S, Bradley A, Cantlin T, Rajesh PB. Thopaz portable suction systems in thoracic surgery: an end user assessment and feedback in a tertiary unit. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;6:59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Danitsch D. Benefits of digital thoracic drainage systems. Nurs Times. 2012;108:16–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhou J, Lyu M, Chen N, Wang Z, Hai Y, Hao J, et al. Digital chest drainage is better than traditional chest drainage following pulmonary surgery: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018;54:635–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang H, Hu W, Ma L, Zhang Y. Digital chest drainage system versus traditional chest drainage system after pulmonary resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;14:13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kiyoshi Tamura.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest for this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tamura, K., Sakurai, S. Clinical efficacy of digital chest drainage system in cardiac valve surgery. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 70, 619–623 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: