Double-cuff versus single-cuff bronchial blockers for video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: A randomized controlled trial

Clinical Snapshot

Key Findings

• P Value: P = 0.02 for primary outcome

• Effect Size: 22.5% absolute risk reduction in malpositioning

• Primary Outcome: Incidence of bronchial blocker malpositioning: 7.5% (DcBB) vs 30% (ScBB)

• Nnt Or Sensitivity: Number needed to treat = 4.4 (to prevent one case of malpositioning)

• Confidence Interval: Not reported in abstract

Clinical Application

Requires availability of double-cuff bronchial blockers and trained anesthesiologists, with acceptance of longer placement time Relevant to Australian thoracic surgery practice, though device availability through TGA approval and PBS listing would need consideration. Aligns with ANZCA guidelines for one-lung ventilation Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy requiring one-lung ventilation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bronchial blockers (BBs) manage airways during thoracoscopic lobectomy and isolate lungs by occluding the bronchus at the surgical site. However, intraoperative malpositioning remains a concern. We compared the performance of a new double-cuff BB (DcBB) with an additional cuff near the end of a single-cuff BB (ScBB) with that of ScBBs during thoracoscopic lobectomy. METHODS: This single-center, randomized, parallel, controlled clinical study enrolled 80 patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer at Nanpi People's Hospital. The patients were randomized into two groups (n = 40 each); DcBB (DcBB used during one-lung ventilation) and ScBB (ScBB used during one-lung ventilation). The primary outcomes were the incidence and number of BB malpositioning. Secondary outcomes time for BB placement and positioning, surgical duration, hypoxemia, incidence of adverse cardiovascular events, grades of lung collapse, surgeon satisfaction, tracheal wall damage assessed during bronchoscopy, contamination rates of the non-surgical lung lobe on the surgical site determined by bronchoscopy, radiographic incidence of pulmonary infiltration on postoperative day 1, and intraoperative blood gas values. RESULTS: The incidence of malpositioning was significantly lower in the DcBB than the ScBB group (7.5% vs. 30%, P = 0.02). The incidence of malposition was significantly lower in the DcBB cohort (P = 0.002). However, positioning the DcBB required more time (32.28 ± 5.37 vs. 19.90 ± 4.16 sec, P < 0.001). Other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy, the DcBB was associated with a lower incidence of malposition than the ScBB. The DcBB did not increase tracheal wall injury or cause significant adverse hemodynamic effects, and therefore may serve as a promising optional device for airway management during thoracoscopic lobectomy, particularly in clinical scenarios requiring high placement stability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2400086472.

References

1. 1.Tang, G., Li, X., Liu, H., Song, S., Zhang, F., Zhang, S., & Zhou, C. (2026). Double-cuff versus single-cuff bronchial blockers for video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0350007