Closed suction or penrose drainage after partial nephrectomy: does it matter?

Abstract

Purpose: Prospective studies in the general surgery literature have shown fewer wound related complications with closed suction drainage than with open passive drainage. Nevertheless, some urologists avoid closed suction drains after partial nephrectomy mainly because of a theoretical increased risk of a prolonged urinary leak or delayed hemorrhage.

Materials and methods: We reviewed the records of 184 patients who underwent 197 consecutive partial nephrectomies at our institution. Closed suction or open passive (Penrose) drainage was used based on surgeon preference. Drain type was compared with duration of use and the incidence of relevant complications.

Results: A Penrose drain was used in 37.6% (74 of 197) of partial nephrectomies and a closed suction drain was used in 62.4% (123). Clinical characteristics were equivalent between both groups, including age, body mass index, tumor size (mean 3.1 cm), number of renal tumors excised, estimated blood loss and operative time. There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of drainage between the Penrose group (mean 7.1 days) and the closed suction group (7.8 days). While we found variation in the incidence of relevant complications by drain type, none of these differences was statistically significant. Complications included prolonged urinary drainage in 7.6% of cases (8.9% closed suction, 5.4% Penrose), wound infection or perinephric abscess in 3.6% (2.4% closed suction, 5.4% Penrose) and delayed hemorrhage in 1.5% (2.4% closed suction, 0 Penrose).

Conclusions: No statistically significant differences in postoperative morbidity were observed between the use of closed suction or Penrose retroperitoneal drains after partial nephrectomy.