COMPLICATIONS OF INTRA ABDOMINAL DRAINS: A SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

Objective: To compare frequency of intra-abdominal complications in drainage and non-drainage group among patents who underwent intra-abdominal surgeries. Study Design: Comparative prospective study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Surgery, Pakistan Ordinance Factory, Wah Cantt, from Mar 2018 to Jul 2018. Methodology: There were 32 patients, 16 in each group. Patients were selected through the process of consecutive sampling. Patients were randomly divided into two groups (random number table method); group A patients underwent intra-abdominal drain while group B was non-drainage group. Patients were followed up for 7 days and observed for complications. Results: Total 32 patients were included in the study. There were 14 (43.8%) males and 18 (56.3%) females. Mean age of patients was 43.2 ± 9.5 years. Drain group showed significantly low anastomosis leakage (p=0.02), wound infection (p=0.05), mortality (p=0.04), pulmonary complications (p=0.05) and bleeding (p=0.03) as compared to the non-drain group. Conclusion: Intra-abdominal drains are associated with several complications. Anastomosis leakage is the most common complication following pulmonary complications and bleeding. However, drains help in early detection of complications and timely management of such complications leads to better outcome of a surgical procedure.

Comparative study of use of 32-F, multi-perforated tube drainage of subcutaneous plane versus no drainage, in laparotomy

Background: We are concerned about the wound management and wound healing amongst post-operative patients, as wound complications increase the morbidity of patients post-surgery. Most common wound complications post-surgery are wound seromas, hematomas and surgical site infections (SSIs). SSIs lead to increased hospital stay and increased morbidity alongside increasing unnecessary patient suffering and a decreased quality of life. The underlying principle for the use of subcutaneous drains is based on the belief that removal of serum or debris and eradication of dead space in subcutaneous plane will bring down the rate of infection and wound complications.Methods: A randomized control study was conducted at the General Surgery Department at SGT Medical College, Gurgoan, Haryana. In total, 60 patients were selected (after taking informed written consent) among those admitted to the Surgery Department for laparotomy procedure. Patients were divided randomly into two groups i.e., group-A (study group) and group-B (control group). In group-A patients, subcutaneous wounds were closed over a drain (32-F multi-perforated drain), while in group-B patients no drain was used. Intra-operative and post-operative findings were recorded and analysed to draw study conclusions.Results: SSIs were observed significantly higher among patients without subcutaneous drain (group-B). Patients of group-B had significantly higher incidence of seroma and pus as compared to group-A patients. Experience of pain was reported higher among the patients without subcutaneous drain (group-B).Conclusions: Subcutaneous drains play an important role in reducing the incidence of SSIs, wound complications, wound pain; thereby lead to better healing of the surgical wound.

Is Prophylactic Abdominal Drainage Necessary After Laparoscopic Colectomy For Colon Cancer? A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background: In 2018, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommended against routine drainage after colorectal surgery. However, the evidence is relatively old and few studies were performed in low-to-middle income country (LMIC) setting. This study aimed to compare outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy with and without prophylactic drainage for colon cancer.Methods: A retrospective study was performed from 2018 to 2021 with patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy with D3 lymphadenectomy for colon cancer. The use of prophylactic drainage was depended on routine practice of surgeons. Outcomes were postoperative complications and postoperative hospital length of stay. The drain and no-drain groups were compared using propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis.Results: The study included 143 patients (59 in the drain group and 84 in the no-drain group). The PSM resulted in 94 patients (47 in each group). Median age was 62 years. The most frequent was right hemicolectomy (33.6%), followed by left hemicolectomy (32.2%), sigmoid colectomy (21%), extended right hemicolectomy (9.8%), transverse hemicolectomy (2.1%), and total colectomy (1.4%). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the no-drain group (median of 5 versus 6 days). The no-drain group also had lower rate of complications (23.8% versus 30.5% and 23.4% versus 34% before and after matching respectively) and less severe complications based on Clavien-Dindo classification, but the difference was not significant.Conclusions: Laparoscopic colectomy without prophylactic drainage is safe in the treatment of colon cancer. This approach can shorten postoperative hospital stay and should be applied even in the LMIC setting.Main novel aspect: Laparoscopic colectomy without prophylactic drainage for colon cancer can be applied in low-to-middle income settings.

Inappropriate manipulation and drainage exacerbate post-operative pain and prolong the hospital stay after laparoscopic appendectomy for pediatric complicated appendicitis

Background This study examined whether drain placement or not is associated with the postoperative outcomes of pediatric patients following trans-umbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA) for complicated appendicitis. Methods The medical records of pediatric patients undergoing TUSPLA for acute complicated appendicitis from January 2012 to September 2018 in Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital were reviewed retrospectively. They were classified according to whether they received passive drainage with a Penrose drain (Penrose group) (19), active drainage with a Jackson-Pratt drain with a vacuum bulb (JP group) (16), or no drain (non-drain group) (86). The postoperative outcomes of the three groups were compared. Results Postoperative visual analog scale pain score was significantly higher in the non-drain group than in either the JP group or Penrose group. Patients in the Penrose group had a significantly longer postoperative hospital stay than those in the non-drain group and a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess, while patients in the JP group had a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay; moreover, no patient in JP group developed a postoperative intra-abdominal abscess. Conclusions Compared to passive drainage with a Penrose drain or no drain, active drainage with a JP drain shorter the postoperative hospital stay and decreased the risk of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess.

DRAIN VERSUS NO DRAIN AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY-A COMPARATIVE STUDY.

INTRODUCTION Gallstones are the most common conditions encountered in surgical OPD. The prevalence rose with age, except in women of 40-49 years, so that at 60-69 years, 22.4% of women and 11.5% of men had gall stones or had undergone cholecystectomy. With the help of this study, best treatment option for cholecystectomy patient (whether to insert drain or not), was ensured in terms of post lap cholecystectomy collections of bile or blood, drain site pain. The study was provide knowledge whether drain insertion was benecial or harmful to patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS This comparative study was presented to the surgery OPD and emergency department with cholelithiasis within a period of 1 year from the approval of Research committee and Ethics Committee, Adesh institute of medical sciences and research, Bathinda. The primary outcome variable used to calculate sample size is amount of collection on post-operative day 3(Quantitative Variable) in both groups. Total 100 patients were present in this study. RESULT In this present study VAS median grade in patients with drain was G4 (48%), followed by G3(47%) then G2(5%). VAS median grade in without drain group was G2 (48%), followed by G3(31%) and G1(16%). CONCLUSION There is no signicant difference as far as post operative wound infection in laparoscopic Cholecystectomy with drain or without drain. Therefore in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy keeping drain can be avoided as it does not provide any additional benet.

TP7.2.10 The Un-abating Debate of using Drains following Colorectal Anastomosis: a systematic review

Aims To study whether routine use of drains in colorectal surgery/anastomosis help reduce postoperative complications and whether has a selective role in high risk patients. Methods A systematic search of electronic database performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central database. Clinical literature from 1988 to 2018 was reviewed including randomized, non-randomized controlled studies, meta-analysis and systematic reviews for routine use of drain versus no usage of drain at index surgery & compared for clinical benefits. Terms used for search were ‘colorectal’, ‘rectal’, ‘colonic’ surgery/anastomosis’ and drain. Main outcome: anastomotic leak whilst secondary outcome were to study collections, re-surgical intervention, wound infection, DVT/PE, chest complications & mortality. Case reports and small cohort studies (<25 patients) were excluded. Results 2243 patients were included from 14 RCTs, 2 meta-analysis and 3 systematic reviews. 1178 patients in the drain group and 1065 patients in the no drain group. Using Chi square test, data analysis demonstrated no statistically significant differences between the two groups (drains Versus no drains) for anastomotic leakage, P >0.35; re-operation, P >0.41, wound infection, P >0.41; DVT/PE, P > 1.1; chest complications, P > 0.51 and mortality, P >0.48. Conclusions Routine use of drains in colorectal surgery/anastomosis does not confer significant benefit in reducing postoperative complications. However, selective use of drains in the high risk patients for anastomotic leak may have a role but warrants more studies.

Single-port VATS combined with non-indwelling drain in ERAS: a retrospective study

Background We investigated single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) combined with a postoperative non-indwelling drain in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Methods The clinical data of 127 patients who underwent double- and single-port VATS from January 2018 to December 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. The groups constituted 71 cases undergoing double-port and 56 cases undergoing single-port VATS (30 cases in the indwelling drain group and 26 cases in the non-indwelling drain group). The incidence of postoperative complications, pain scores, and postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Results Compared with the double-port group, the single-port group had shorter postoperative hospital stays and lower pain scores on the first and third postoperative days (P < 0.05). Pain scores on the first and third days were lower in the single-port non-indwelling drain group than in the single-port indwelling drain group (P < 0.05), and the postoperative hospitalization time was significantly shorter in the single-port group (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups for operation time, incidence of complications, and pain scores 1 month after operation (P > 0.05). Conclusions The combination of single-port VATS with a non-indwelling drain can relieve postoperative pain, help patients recover quickly, and is in accordance with ERAS.

To drain or not to drain: the association between residual intraperitoneal gas and post-laparoscopic shoulder pain for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Residual intra-peritoneal gas may be associated with post-laparoscopic shoulder pain (PLSP), which is a frequently and disturbance compliant after surgery. Herein, we aimed to examine whether expiring residual gas via a surgical drain reduces the frequency and intensity of PLSP in the first day after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. 448 participants were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. The incidence and severity of PLSP after surgery were recorded. Of these, the cumulative incidence of PLSP in the drain group was lower particularly at the 12th postoperative hour (18.3% vs. 27.6%; P = 0.022), 24th postoperative hour (28.8% vs. 38.1%; P = 0.039), and throughout the first postoperative day (P = 0.035). The drain group had less severe PLSP (crude Odds ratio, 0.66; P = .036). After adjustment using inverse probability of treatment weighting, the drain group also had a significant lower PLSP incidence (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.61, P < 0.001), and less severe PLSP (adjusted odds ratio = 0.56, P < 0.001). In conclusion, the maneuver about passive force to expel residual gas, surgical drain use, contributes to reduce the incidence and severity of PLSP, suggesting that to minimize residual gas at the end of surgery is useful to attenuate PLSP.

Prophylactic Intra-Peritoneal Drainage After Pancreatic Resection: An Updated Meta-Analysis

IntroductionProphylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely placed drainage during abdominal surgery may be unnecessary or even harmful to some patients, due to the possibility of increasing complications. And there is still controversy about the prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the incidence of complications after either pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) in the drain group and no-drain group.MethodsData were retrieved from four electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science up to December 2020, including the outcomes of individual treatment after PD and DP, mortality, morbidity, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leak, wound infection, postoperative hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, intervened radiology (IR), and readmission. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and the criteria of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of studies included.ResultsWe included 15 studies after strict screening. 13 studies with 16,648 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different surgery procedures, and 4 studies with 6,990 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different fistula risk. For patients undergoing PD, the drain group had lower mortality but higher rate of CR-POPF than the no-drain group. For patients undergoing DP, the drain group had higher rates of CR-POPF, wound infection and readmission. There were no significant differences in bile leak, hemorrhage, DGE, intra-abdominal abscess, and IR in either overall or each subgroup. For Low-risk subgroup, the rates of hemorrhage, DGE and morbidity were higher after drainage. For High-risk subgroup, the rate of hemorrhage was higher while the rates of reoperation and morbidity were lower in the drain group.ConclusionsIntraperitoneal drainage may benefit some patients undergoing PD, especially those with high pancreatic fistula risk. For DP, current evidences suggest that routine drainage might not benefit patients, but no clear conclusions can be drawn because of the study limitations.

ROLE OF SUBCUTANEOUS SUCTION DRAIN IN REDUCING SURGICAL SITE INFECTIONS AFTER EMERGENCY LAPAROTOMY AT SKMCH, MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR

Background: One of important morbidity postoperatively is surgical site infection and the important cause is collection of blood and serous uids which can get infected and this factor is even more important in emergency laparotomies. our prospective randomised study compares the incidence of surgical site infection in post emergency abdominal surgical wounds with subcutaneous suction drains versus those in whom drain was not placed. Methods: A prospective interventional study of 100 subjects done in department of surgery at Sri Krishna Medical College and Hospital, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. On the basis of exclusion and inclusion criteria patient were randomly selected for cases (with post-operative suction drain) and controls. subcutaneous drain in emergency setting play signicant role in reducing the incidence of surgical site infection which is signicant statistically. Results: 24% of patients in drain group develop surgical site infections. 50% of patients in non-drain group develop infection. Incidence of infection in drain group was lower than the no drain group (p value 0.05) and was statistically signicant. Conclusions: Subcutaneous drain in emergency laparotomy play signicant role in reducing the incidence of surgical site infection