Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis compared the quality of lung collapse and the resultant adverse reactions between the use of double-lumen endotracheal tubes (DLT) and bronchial blockers (BB) in minimally invasive thoracic surgery. METHODS: A search was performed in five bibliographic databases, namely PubMed, Springer, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library ignoring the original language, which identified five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published on or before December 31, 2021. These studies were subsequently analyzed. All included studies compared the efficacy and safety of DLT and BB as a lung isolation technique in surgery. The methodological quality of each study was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. The quality of lung collapse and the malposition rate were adopted as the main outcome indicators. Alternatively, the intubation time and the incidence of postoperative sore throat were adopted as secondary indicators. RESULTS: When either DLT or BB were utilized in minimally invasive thoracic surgery, no differences were observed in the quality of lung collapse (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 1.58), the intubation time (mean difference [MD], 0.06; 95% CI, -1.02 to 1.14), or the malposition rate (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.37 to 2.06). However, the incidence of postoperative sore throat among patients treated with BB was significantly lower than that among patients treated with DLT (OR, 5.25; 95% CI, 2.55 to 10.75). CONCLUSION: When utilized in minimally invasive thoracic surgery, the quality of lung collapse with DLT was identical to that with BB. However, patients treated with the latter demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of postoperative sore throat.