-
Something wrong with this record ?
Results of a randomized controlled trial comparing closed-suction drains versus passive gravity drains after pancreatic resection
F. Čečka, B. Jon, P. Skalický, E. Čermáková, Č. Neoral, M. Loveček,
Language English Country United States
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Time Factors MeSH
- Length of Stay statistics & numerical data MeSH
- Drainage methods MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Pancreatic Neoplasms surgery MeSH
- Follow-Up Studies MeSH
- Suction methods MeSH
- Pancreas surgery MeSH
- Pancreatectomy adverse effects MeSH
- Pancreatic Fistula epidemiology etiology prevention & control MeSH
- Postoperative Complications epidemiology etiology prevention & control MeSH
- Reoperation statistics & numerical data MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Patient Readmission statistics & numerical data MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Multicenter Study MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
BACKGROUND: This dual-center, randomized controlled trial aimed to compare 2 types of intra-abdominal drains after pancreatic resection and their effect on the development of pancreatic fistulae and postoperative complications. METHODS: Patients undergoing pancreatic resection were randomized to receive either a closed-suction drain or a closed, passive gravity drain. The primary endpoint was the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula. A secondary endpoint was postoperative morbidity during follow-up of 3 months. The planned sample size was 223 patients. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients were assessed for eligibility, 223 of whom were randomly allocated. One patient was lost during follow-up, and 111 patients in each group were analyzed. The rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (closed-suction 43.2%, passive 36.9%, P = .47) and overall morbidity (closed-suction 51.4%, passive 40.5%, P = .43) were not different between the groups. We did not find any differences between the groups in reoperation rate (P = .45), readmission rate (P = .27), hospital stay (P = .68), or postoperative hemorrhage (P = .11). We found a significantly lesser amount of drain fluid in the passive gravity drains between the second and fifth postoperative days and also on the day of drain removal compared with closed-suction drains. CONCLUSION: The type of drain (passive versus closed suction) had no influence on the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistulae. The closed-suction drains did not increase the rate of postoperative complications. We found that the passive gravity drains are more at risk for obstruction, whereas the closed-suction drains kept their patency for greater duration.
1st Department of Surgery Medical Faculty and University Hospital Olomouc Czech Republic
Department of Surgery Medical Faculty and University Hospital Hradec Králové Czech Republic
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc19028284
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20190822104643.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 190813s2018 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.surg.2018.05.030 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)30082139
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Čečka, Filip $u Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Czech Republic. Electronic address: filip.cecka@seznam.cz.
- 245 10
- $a Results of a randomized controlled trial comparing closed-suction drains versus passive gravity drains after pancreatic resection / $c F. Čečka, B. Jon, P. Skalický, E. Čermáková, Č. Neoral, M. Loveček,
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: This dual-center, randomized controlled trial aimed to compare 2 types of intra-abdominal drains after pancreatic resection and their effect on the development of pancreatic fistulae and postoperative complications. METHODS: Patients undergoing pancreatic resection were randomized to receive either a closed-suction drain or a closed, passive gravity drain. The primary endpoint was the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula. A secondary endpoint was postoperative morbidity during follow-up of 3 months. The planned sample size was 223 patients. RESULTS: A total of 294 patients were assessed for eligibility, 223 of whom were randomly allocated. One patient was lost during follow-up, and 111 patients in each group were analyzed. The rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (closed-suction 43.2%, passive 36.9%, P = .47) and overall morbidity (closed-suction 51.4%, passive 40.5%, P = .43) were not different between the groups. We did not find any differences between the groups in reoperation rate (P = .45), readmission rate (P = .27), hospital stay (P = .68), or postoperative hemorrhage (P = .11). We found a significantly lesser amount of drain fluid in the passive gravity drains between the second and fifth postoperative days and also on the day of drain removal compared with closed-suction drains. CONCLUSION: The type of drain (passive versus closed suction) had no influence on the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistulae. The closed-suction drains did not increase the rate of postoperative complications. We found that the passive gravity drains are more at risk for obstruction, whereas the closed-suction drains kept their patency for greater duration.
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a drenáž $x metody $7 D004322
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a následné studie $7 D005500
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a délka pobytu $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D007902
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a pankreas $x chirurgie $7 D010179
- 650 _2
- $a pankreatektomie $x škodlivé účinky $7 D010180
- 650 _2
- $a pankreatická píštěl $x epidemiologie $x etiologie $x prevence a kontrola $7 D010185
- 650 _2
- $a nádory slinivky břišní $x chirurgie $7 D010190
- 650 _2
- $a znovupřijetí pacienta $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D010359
- 650 _2
- $a pooperační komplikace $x epidemiologie $x etiologie $x prevence a kontrola $7 D011183
- 650 _2
- $a reoperace $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D012086
- 650 _2
- $a odsávání $x metody $7 D013396
- 650 _2
- $a časové faktory $7 D013997
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
- 655 _2
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Jon, Bohumil $u Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Skalický, Pavel $u First Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Olomouc, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Čermáková, Eva $u Department of Medical Biophysics, Medical Faculty Hradec Králové, Charles University, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Neoral, Čestmír $u First Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Olomouc, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Loveček, Martin $u First Department of Surgery, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Olomouc, Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00004457 $t Surgery $x 1532-7361 $g Roč. 164, č. 5 (2018), s. 1057-1063
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30082139 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20190813 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20190822104921 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1433433 $s 1066744
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2018 $b 164 $c 5 $d 1057-1063 $e 20180804 $i 1532-7361 $m Surgery $n Surgery $x MED00004457
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20190813
