-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
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,
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články, multicentrická studie, randomizované kontrolované studie, práce podpořená grantem
- MeSH
- časové faktory MeSH
- délka pobytu statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- drenáž metody MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory slinivky břišní chirurgie MeSH
- následné studie MeSH
- odsávání metody MeSH
- pankreas chirurgie MeSH
- pankreatektomie škodlivé účinky MeSH
- pankreatická píštěl epidemiologie etiologie prevence a kontrola MeSH
- pooperační komplikace epidemiologie etiologie prevence a kontrola MeSH
- reoperace statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- znovupřijetí pacienta statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
- srovnávací studie 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
Citace poskytuje 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