Determination of Comfort Levels and Spiritual Care Needs of Gynecologic Cancer Patients with Abdominal Drains: A Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study in Turkey.

This study was conducted to determine the comfort levels and spiritual care needs of gynecologic cancer patients with abdominal drains. The study was conducted with 61 gynecologic cancer patients with abdominal drains at the gynecologic oncology surgery clinic of a state hospital in Turkey. Data were collected using the "Participant Information Form," "Perianesthesia Comfort Questionnaire (PCQ)", and "Spiritual Care Needs Inventory". Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to analyze the data. It was found that the postoperative comfort of the patients in this study was above a moderate level. Patients who did not need spiritual care, did not fulfil religious rituals regularly and did not receive social support had a high level of comfort in the early postoperative period. Patients with gynecologic cancer were found to have high spiritual care needs. Patients without chronic diseases, possessing a single abdominal drain, familiar with the concept of spiritual care, expressing a need for spiritual care, engaging in regular religious rituals, and enjoying social support were identified as having elevated spiritual care needs. Within the framework of holistic nursing care provided to gynecologic cancer patients with abdominal drains, the results reveal the necessity of spiritual care and the importance of comfort.

Abdominal drainage after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: out of sight, out of mind?

BACKGROUNDS: The use of drains in pancreatic surgery remains controversial. The present study investigated postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) without intraperitoneal drain placement. METHODS: Data of consecutive patients undergoing MIDP between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively collected. Patients were divided in drain group (DG), including patients with prophylactic abdominal drain placed, and no-drain group (NDG) including those without drain. The groups were compared in terms of postoperative outcomes, using a propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: 116 patients were selected. After matching, DG and NDG consisted of 29 patients each. The rates of POPF and abdominal collection were lower in NDG in comparison to DG (3.4% vs. 27.6%, p 0.025 and 3.4% vs. 31.0%, p 0.011, respectively). The length of stay was significantly shorter in the NDG (5 vs. 9 days, p < 0.001). No difference between the groups was found for other outcomes. CONCLUSION: Drain omission was associated with lower rates of POPF and abdominal collections, as well as shorter hospital stays, not affecting the rate of severe complication, reoperation and readmission.

The Impact of Drain Placement on Postoperative Complications in Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Obesity in individuals can have consequences ranging from metabolically healthy obesity to serious morbidities and reduce the quality and duration of life. A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the role of abdominal drainage on postoperative complications after bariatric surgery. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for eligible studies. The results revealed that abdominal drainage was associated with surgical complications, with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 1.70 (P < .001), but not associated with wound infection (OR: 1.04; P = .762). Associations with surgical complications were mainly detected from retrospective cohort studies. The use of abdominal drainage showed associations with death (OR: 1.68; P < .001) and reoperation (OR: 1.49; P < .001). These findings revealed that abdominal drainage during bariatric surgery was associated with surgical complications, death, and reoperation. These results should be taken with caution since randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies were analyzed together.

Propensity score matching study of the feasibility of no-prophylactic abdominal drainage strategy for the minimally invasive minor hepatectomy / 中华肝胆外科杂志

Objective:To evaluate the feasibility of abandoning prophylactic abdominal drainage in patients undergoing minimally invasive minor hepatectomy based on a propensity score matching (PSM) study.Methods:Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of patients undergoing minimally invasive minor hepatectomy from July 2022 to May 2023 at the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital. A total of 108 patients were enrolled, including 48 males and 60 females, aged (60.8±13.7) years old. According to whether the abdominal drainage tube was prophylactically placed intraoperatively, patients were divided into two groups: the drainage group (with prophylactic placement of abdominal drainage tubes, n=76); the no-drainage group (without prophylactic placement of abdominal drainage tubes, n=32). PSM was used to compare the perioperative data between the groups, including extent of liver resection, intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and postoperative complications. Postoperative survival status within 90 days was followed up through telephone review. Results:Before PSM, the two groups differed significantly on age and the history of hypertension (both P<0.05). After PSM, there were 23 patients in each group. Patients in the two groups showed comparable results regarding the intraoperative parameters including the surgical method, pathological types, the number and maxium diameter of hepatic lesions, the extent and complexity of liver resection, and the duration of hepatic inflow occlusion (all P>0.05). No postoperative intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in either group. The incidences of postoperative complications were comparable between the groups, including fever, bile leakage, incision infection, and abdominal acupuncture for drainage (all P>0.05). After PSM, compared to patients wothout prophylactic abdominal drainage, prophylactic abdominal drainage group showed a decreased white blood cell counts on postoperative day 1 [9.39(6.30, 10.58)×10 12/L vs. 13.19(10.15, 14.90)×10 12 /L, P=0.006] and a shorter length of postoperative hospital stay [4(3, 5) d vs. 5(4, 5) d, P=0.033]. No postoperative death within 90 days occurred in either group. Conclusion:In minimally invasive minor hepatectomy, abandoning prophylactic abdominal drainage could be feasible, which facilitates fast recovery without increasing the incidence of postoperative fever, perihepatic fluid accumulation and postoperative abdominal acupuncture for drainage.

Management of uroperitoneum through combination of conservative and surgical treatments in two colts.

Background: Ruptures of the urinary bladder and urachus are the most frequent cause of uroperitoneum in foals. Surgical correction is often the first treatment choice, however, nonsurgical methods, such as urine removal via urinary catheters and abdominal drains, have been successfully performed in foals. Case Description: Two foals were referred to the Equine Perinatology Unit for suspicion of uroperitoneum. The diagnosis was confirmed by hematobiochemical and ultrasound examinations, thus cystorrhaphy and cystoplasty were attempted. Surgeons found a lesion in the dorsocranial margin of the bladder (Case 1) and a tear in the pelvic urethra (Case 2); in the first case, the defect was routinely repaired, while the last lesion was impossible to repair due to its localization. A urinary catheter was left in place in both cases. Uroperitoneum recurred 72 hours after the surgery in both foals: a second surgical correction was not recommended due to the localization of the tears and conservative treatment, with the placement of a 32F chest tube in the most ventral part of the abdomen, was preferred. Abdominal drains were removed 5-7 days after surgery, while urinary catheters were left in place for up to 7-8 days. Colts' conditions improved during hospitalizations. Two months after bladder surgery, Case 1 was euthanized due to multiple adhesions between the small intestine and the abdominal wall. Case 2 was still alive one year postoperatively. Conclusion: Although it cannot be considered the first choice for the treatment of uroperitoneum in the foal, nonsurgical treatment was successful in both cases in the short-term follow-up. However, the prognosis should be cautious due to the risk of long-term complications. Conservative management may be used to manage bladder/urethral tears that cannot be solved by surgery.

Comparison of the complications of passive drainage and active suction drainage after pancreatectomy: A meta-analysis.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effect of passive drainage and active suction drainage on complications after pancreatectomy. Methods: The databases were searched and covered in this study on the comparison of passive and active suction drainage after pancreatectomy from the database establishment to Feb. 2023. A meta-analysis was conducted with the RevMan5.3 software. Results: On the whole, 1,903 cases were included in eight studies, including 994 cases in the passive drainage group, 909 in the active suction drainage group, 1,224 in the pancreaticoduodenectomy group, as well as 679 in the distal pancreatectomy group. No statistically significant difference was identified between the two groups in the incidence of total complications, the rate of abdominal hemorrhage, the rate of abdominal effusion, the death rate and the length of stay after pancreatectomy (all P > 0.05), whereas the difference in the incidence of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy between the two groups was of statistical significance (OR = 3.35, 95% CI = 1.12-10.07, P = 0.03). No significant difference was reported in pancreatic fistula between the two groups after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Conclusion: After distal pancreatectomy, active suction drainage might down-regulate the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Surgery in Ovarian Cancer: Drainage, Stoma Utility and Risk Factors.

Objective: to evaluate the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), risk factors and utility of drainage and stoma in patients undergoing intestinal surgery for ovarian cancer in a single institution and in a review of the literature. Methods: retrospective study that includes consecutive patients undergoing debulking surgery with en bloc pelvic resection with rectosigmoid colectomy for ovarian cancer between 1 November 2011 and 31 December 2021. Data regarding patient and tumour characteristics, surgical procedure, hospitalisation, complications and follow-up were recorded and analysed. The PubMed database was explored for recent publications on this topic. Results: Seventy-five patients were enrolled in the study. All anastomoses were performed at a distance of >6 cm from the anal margin, with negative leak tests and tension-free anastomosis. Diverting stoma were performed in just three patients (4%). At least one perianastomotic pelvic drain was positioned in 71 patients (94.7%) and was removed on average on postoperative day 7. Four patients (5.3%) experienced AL. In all cases, the drain content was not the only sign of complication, as the clinical signs were also highly suggestive. Just one patient received conservative treatment. Average postoperative hospitalisation was 14.6 days (SD: ±9.7). There were no deaths at 30 and 60 days after surgery. Between the AL and non-AL groups, statistically significant differences were observed for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, length of the intestinal resection and fitness for chemotherapy at 30 days. In ovarian cancer, rectosigmoid resection is a standardised procedure with comparable results for AL, and risk factors for AL are discretely homogeneous. What is neither homogeneous nor standardised according to the literature is the use of stomas and/or drains. Conclusion: use in the future of protective stoma and/or intra-abdominal drains is to be explored in selected and standardised situations to verify their preventive role.

The role of T-tubes and abdominal drains on short-term outcomes in liver transplantation - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and expert panel recommendation aims to answer the question regarding the routine use of T-tubes or abdominal drains to better manage complications and thereby improve outcomes after liver transplantation. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel to assess the potential risks and benefits of T-tubes and intra-abdominal drainage in liver transplantation (CRD42021243036). RESULTS: Of the 2996 screened records, 33 studies were included in the systematic review, of which 29 (six RCTs) assessed the use of T-tubes and four regarding surgical drains. Although some studies reported less strictures when using a T-tube, there was a trend toward more biliary complications with T-tubes, mainly related to biliary leakage. Due to the small number of studies, there was a paucity of evidence on the effect of abdominal drains with no clear benefit for or against the use of drainage. However, one study investigating the open vs. closed circuit drains found a significantly higher incidence of intra-abdominal infections when open-circuit drains were used. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the potential risk of biliary leakage and infections, the routine intraoperative insertion of T-tubes is not recommended (Level of Evidence moderate - very low; grade of recommendation strong). However, a T-tube can be considered in cases at risk for biliary stenosis. Due to the scant evidence on abdominal drainage, no change in clinical practice in individual centers is recommended. (Level of Evidence very low; weak recommendation).

Dynamic endoluminal contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for display of drainages in inflammatory abdominal fluid collections1.

AIM: To evaluate the additive clinical value of endoluminal contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) after interventional placement of drainages in abdominal fluid collections. MATERIAL/METHOD: Examination of 30 patients using a 1-6 MHz convex probe (Resona 7, Mindray) to locate the fluid collection in B-Mode. Additionally, dynamic endoluminal CEUS with 1 ml sulphur-hexafluoride microbubbles was performed to measure the extent of the percutaneously drained abscesses. Independent assessment of dynamically stored images in PACS in DICOM format. Correlation to reference imaging using computed tomography (CT). RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were examined (17 m, 19-78 years, mean 56.1 years). Drainages were positioned in the liver in 15 cases, in the pelvis after kidney transplantation in 4 cases, close to the spleen in 1 case, and in the abdomen in 10 cases. In all cases abscesses showed marginal hyperaemia with reactive septations in CEUS. The drainage position was assessed by means of B-mode in all cases first and then by CEUS. In 4 cases CEUS showed a fistula to the pleura, in 5 cases to the peritoneum, in 2 cases to the intestine, in 5 cases to the biliary tract, corresponding to the CT. In 2 cases there was a hint of an anastomotic leakage after intestinal anastomosis, which was reliably detected by CT. The drainage was removed in 11 cases within a period of 2 to 5 days after CEUS control, in 9 cases within a period of 5 to 10 days. Another operation was necessary in 3 cases. A new drainage was placed in 2 cases. The required amount of ultrasound contrast medium is 1 ml endoluminally diluted to 9 ml sodium chloride. CONCLUSION: CEUS facilitates the exact localization and characterization of inflammatory abdominal fluid collections. Furthermore, possible fistulas can be detected that cannot be seen with conventional ultrasound.

Interventional Radiology Options after Visceral Surgery.

Background: Postoperative management of patients undergoing visceral surgery can present challenging clinical situations with significant morbidity and mortality. Interventional radiological techniques offer quick, safe, and effective minimally invasive treatment options in the postoperative management of visceral surgery. Summary: Most commonly done procedures include - but are not limited to - fluid or abscess drainage, biliary diversion, bleeding embolization, and re-canalization of a thrombosed vessel. While bleeding from side branches after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgeries can be managed by coil embolization, the hepatic arterial injury should be managed by stent-graft placement. Hepatic venous complications can require a transhepatic or transjugular approach, whereas the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt approach has a higher clinical success rate in patients with portal vein thrombosis. Biliary leakages require multidisciplinary management, and interventional radiology can offer an efficient treatment, especially in patients with biliodigestive anastomosis. Key Messages: Interventional radiology provides a broad spectrum of procedures in the management of patients with recent visceral surgery.

Prophylactic abdominal drainage following appendectomy for complicated appendicitis: A meta-analysis.

Background: To date, the value of prophylactic abdominal drainage (AD) following appendectomy in patients with complicated appendicitis (CA), including adults and children, has yet to be determined. This paper presents a meta-analysis of the effects of prophylactic AD on postoperative complications in patients with CA, with the goal of exploring the safety and effectiveness of prophylactic AD. Methods: PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for relevant articles published before August 1, 2022. The primary outcomes were the complication rates [overall incidence of postoperative complications, incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), wound infection (WI), and postoperative ileus (PI), and the secondary outcome was the perioperative outcome]. The meta-analysis was performed with STATA V. 16.0A. Results: A total of 2,627 articles were retrieved and 15 high-quality articles were eventually included after screening, resulting in a total of 5,123 patients, of whom 1,796 received AD and 3,327 did not. The results of this meta-analysis showed that compared with patients in the non-drainage group, patients in the drainage group had longer postoperative length of hospitalization (LOH) (SMD = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.01-1.35, P = 0.046), higher overall incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.19-0.81, P = 0.01), higher incidence of WI (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.08-0.51, P = 0.01) and PI (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.57-1.54, P = 0.01), the differences were statistically significant. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of IAA (OR = 0.10, 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.31, P = 0.31) between the two groups. The results of subgroup meta-analysis showed that in the adult subgroup, the overall incidence of postoperative complications in the drainage group was higher than that in the non-drainage group (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.37-0.96, P = 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in IAA (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: -0.28 to 0.64, P = 0.45) and WI (OR = 0.13, 95% CI: (-0.40 to 0.66, P = 0.63) and PI (OR = 2.71, 95% CI: -0.29 to 5.71, P = 0.08). In the children subgroup, there were no significant differences in the incidence of IAA (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: -0.06 to 1.09, P = 0.08) between the two groups. The overall incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.02-0.90, P = 0.04), incidences of WI (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.14-0.71, P = 0.01) and PI (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.10-1.39, P = 0.02) were significantly higher than those in the non-drainage group. Conclusion: This meta-analysis concluded that prophylactic AD did not benefit from appendectomy, but increased the incidence of related complications, especially in children with CA. Thus, there is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of prophylactic AD following appendectomy.

Analysis of the risk factors related to prolonged drainage time in patients with selective abdominal drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy / 中华肝胆外科杂志

Objective:To determine the risk factors of drainage time longer than 1 day in patients with selective abdominal drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Methods:The clinical data related to patients with selective abdominal drainage undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy from November 2009 to November 2019 at Chinese PLA General Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Of 233 patients enrolled into this study, there were 147 males and 86 females, with a median aged 59.0 (47.5, 65.5) years old. The patients were divided into drainage time 1 day group of 65 patients and longer than 1 day group of 168 patients according to postoperative drainage time. The baseline data and perioperative data were collected, the risk factors correlated with drainage time longer than 1 day were analyzed.Results:The drainage time was 1 in the 1 day group and 2~8 in another group. Among the 233 patients, there was one with biliary leakage and 14 patients had abdominal bleeding, all of them healed after 2~3 days. All of the 233 patients were recovered when discharged. Independent risk factors related to drainage time longer than 1 day include BMI≥28 kg/m 2 ( OR=3.443, 95% CI: 1.411-8.405, P=0.007), operation time ≥65 min ( OR=2.570, 95% CI: 1.310-5.045, P=0.006), thickness of gallbladder wall ≥0.5 cm ( OR=12.720, 95% CI: 1.350-5.478, P=0.005), postoperative stomachache ( OR=13.537, 95% CI: 1.685-108.748, P=0.014) and postoperative fever ( OR=8.156, 95% CI: 1.035-64.249, P=0.046). Conclusion:For patients undergoing selective abdominal drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with BMI ≥28 kg/m 2, operation time ≥65 min, gallbladder wall thickness ≥0.5 cm, postoperative abdominal pain and fever, clinicians should appropriately prolong the drainage time to ensure medical safety.

Neutrophil extracellular trap formation index predicts occurrences of deep surgical site infection after laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Deep surgical site infections (DSSIs) are serious complications after laparotomy. Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) play a vital role in the development of DSSI. Here, we focused on a new approach to predicting the occurrence of DSSI through the detection of the NET formation index (NFI), and compared its prediction ability with other clinical infection indicators. METHODS: Patients who received laparotomy were prospectively enrolled in this study. General information, APACHE II score, SOFA score, and serum infection indicators were recorded. The postoperative abdominal drainage fluid was collected within 3 days after the operation for quantification of the NFI. RESULTS: A total of 92 consecutive patients were included, with 22 patients were diagnosed with DSSI. The NFI in the DSSI group was 32.70%±19.33% while the corresponding index was 10.70%±8.25% in the non-DSSI group (P<0.01). The mean APACHE II and SOFA score had significant differences between the two groups. The NFI was positively correlated with the APACHE II score (P<0.01, r=0.269) and SOFA score (P=0.013, r=0.258). Patients with a high NFI (NFI >13.86%) had a higher risk of developing DSSI. According to the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the NFI, C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) were 0.912, 0.748 and 0.731, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of surgical patients, the quantification of the NFI had a considerable predictive value for early identification of DSSI. The NFI in drainage fluid turned out to be a more sensitive and specific predictor of DSSI than serum infection indicators including CRP and PCT.

Vancomycin Intoxication and Cefepime-induced Encephalopathy Treated by Abdominal Drainage of Massive Ascites in Addition to Online Hemodiafiltration.

A patient with recurrent plasmacytoma with massive ascites exhibited vancomycin intoxication and cefepime-induced encephalopathy due to renal dysfunction. The ascitic accumulation of these drugs was suspected because of the refractory intoxicated state. To remove these drugs that had accumulated in the blood and ascites, abdominal drainage was performed in addition to online hemodiafiltration. If patients with renal dysfunction and massive ascites develop vancomycin intoxication and cefepime-induced encephalopathy that cannot be improved by drug discontinuation, physicians should suspect ascitic accumulation and evaluate the ascitic concentration. Furthermore, if a high accumulation in massive ascites occurs, physicians should perform abdominal drainage along with blood purification.

Good abdominal drainage fluid penetration and pharmacokinetics analysis of vancomycin for severe acute pancreatitis: A case report.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The antibiotic concentration in abdominal drainage fluid is very important for the treatment of patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Previous studies show that quinolones and carbapenems have high abdominal tissue levels, whereas aminoglycosides fail to penetrate into abdominal tissue in sufficient concentrations. However, there are limited data with respect to vancomycin. This case aims to investigate the penetration of vancomycin to abdominal drainage fluid in a 44-year-old SAP patient. CASE SUMMARY: We report a case of a 44-year-old female with SAP, on treatment of vancomycin. The time courses of vancomycin concentration in plasma and abdominal drainage fluid of the patient were described. Simultaneous measurement of abdominal drainage fluid and serum concentrations demonstrated that vancomycin can rapidly penetrate into abdominal tissue in acceptable amounts. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: This case demonstrated that it took about 30 minutes for vancomycin to get from plasma to abdominal drainage fluid and about 76% of vancomycin could move into abdominal drainage fluid for SAP patients.

Evidence-based evaluation of abdominal drainage in pancreatic surgery.

Pancreatic fistula is the most common and dreaded complication after pancreatic resection, responsible for high morbidity and mortality (2 to 30%). Prophylactic drainage of the operative site is usually put in place to decrease and/or detect postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) early. However, this policy is currently debated and the data from the literature are unclear. The goal of this update is to analyze the most recent evidence-based data with regard to prophylactic abdominal drainage after pancreatic resection (pancreatoduodenectomy [PD] or distal pancreatectomy [PD]). This systematic review of the literature between 1990 and 2020 sought to answer the following questions: should drainage of the operative site after pancreatectomy be routine or adapted to the risk of POPF? If a drainage is used, how long should it remain in the abdomen, what criteria should be used to decide to remove it, and what type of drainage should be preferred? Has the introduction of laparoscopy changed our practice? The literature seems to indicate that it is not possible to recommend the omission of routine drainage after pancreatic resection. By contrast, an approach based on the risk of POPF using the fistula risk score seems beneficial. When a drain is placed, early removal (within 5 days) seems feasible based on clinical, laboratory (C-reactive protein, leukocyte count, neutrophile/lymphocyte ratio, dosage and dynamic of amylase in the drains on D1, D3±D5) and radiological findings. This is in line with the development of enhanced recovery programs after pancreatic surgery. Finally, this literature review did not find any specific data relative to mini-invasive pancreatic surgery.

First description of abdominal infection due to Alistipes onderdonkii.

Alistipes spp is a genus of Gram-negative anaerobic rods involved in very few human diseases. We report the first case of abdominal infection due to Alistipes onderdonkii in a 58-year-old man with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. He presented with abdominal pain and general malaise after retrogastric drainage for a pancreatitis episode a few days earlier. After the diagnosis of diffuse peritonitis with perforation and necrotizing pancreatic collection, abundant pancreatic fluid was drained and yielded the isolation of A. onderdonkii in pure culture. Resistance to penicillin and moxifloxacin was documented for this strain. Treatment with metronidazole was prescribed, and the patient was discharged after improvement of his general condition.

Should we still use prophylactic drain in gastrectomy for cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Prophylactic drain in gastrectomy for cancer is still widely used, although some evidence has disputed this practice and spreading enhanced recovery protocol has been pushing towards surgical simplification. This study aimed at assessing the impact of drain placement on important clinical outcomes, evaluating the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or cohort studies whenever information provided by the former was scarce. PubMed, PMC, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases were searched from January 1990 to February 2019, both for RCTs and cohort studies comparing use or avoidance of prophylactic drain in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy. All RCTs and cohort studies were rated according to Jadad score and Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale, respectively. Meta-analysis was separately performed on RCTs and cohort studies. The following clinical outcomes were considered: anastomotic leak, reoperation rate, additional drain procedure, length of stay, postoperative morbidity, postoperative mortality, readmission rate and drain related complications. Overall, 3 RCTs (330 patients) and 7 cohort studies (2897 patients) were included. Seven studies came from Eastern Countries. Meta-analysis on RCTs evidenced that drain avoidance halves overall morbidity (RR = 0.47, 95%CI 0.26-0.86, p = 0.014) and slightly reduces length of stay (SMD -0.24, 95%CI -0.51-0.03, p = 0.083). Only one postoperative death occurred in the drain group. The other outcomes were either not reported or reported just by one RCT each. Meta-analysis on cohort studies, despite higher statistical power, did not highlight any significant difference. This meta-analysis showed that prophylactic drain avoidance can reduce morbidity and length of stay, while not significantly affecting other major surgical outcomes.

The safety of omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after laparoscopic liver resection: Retrospective analysis of 100 consecutive cases.

INTRODUCTION: Whether prophylactic abdominal drainage after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is necessary remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after LLR. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 100 consecutive patients who underwent LLR at Osaka Rosai Hospital from April 2011 to November 2018 was performed. During this period, prophylactic abdominal drainage was routinely omitted during LLR without biliary anastomosis. The primary endpoint was the frequency of additional abdominal drainage. The secondary endpoint was the rate of postoperative complications. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (96%) underwent partial resection or lateral segmentectomy, and 89 patients (89%) were Child-Pugh grade A. The median operative time was 102 (range, 31-274) minutes. The median blood loss was minimal (range, 0-280 ml), and blood transfusion was performed for one patient (1%). One case (1%) was converted to open surgery. Additional abdominal drainage was required for one patient (1%) with an intraabdominal abscess. Postoperative complications were seen in 5 patients (5%). High-grade complications (≥grade III according to the Clavien-Dindo classification) were seen in two patients (2%). There were no cases of reoperation or perioperative death. The median postoperative hospital stay was 8 (range, 4-65) days. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic abdominal drainage could be safely omitted for selected patients and operative procedures.