Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether digital drainage systems reduce chest tube duration and hospital stay following anatomical lung resection in a resource-limited healthcare setting. METHODS: This retrospective study, approved by the institutional ethics committee (Approval No. 30491514.3.0000.0065), compared digital and conventional water seal drainage systems in a public hospital in Brazil. Outcomes included chest tube duration and hospital stay. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to control for confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 388 patients were included (67.8% smokers, mean age 63.8 years). After PSM, 85 matched pairs, no significant differences were observed in most demographic and clinical variables. Lobectomies were more frequent in the conventional group (100% vs 85.9%, P < 0.001). After paired statistical analysis using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed no significant differences in chest tube drainage time (4.2 vs 4.4 days, P = 0.397) or hospital stay duration (4.9 vs 5.2 days, P = 0.745). CONCLUSIONS: In a resource-constrained setting, digital drainage systems are feasible and may support clinical decision-making through precise air leak quantification. However, no significant differences were observed in key outcomes when compared to conventional drainage, warranting further investigation into cost-effectiveness and broader implementation strategies.