Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2011 Jan;396(1):41-52.
doi: 10.1007/s00423-010-0716-0. Epub 2010 Oct 21.

Risk-benefit assessment of closed intra-abdominal drains after pancreatic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the current state of evidence

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Risk-benefit assessment of closed intra-abdominal drains after pancreatic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the current state of evidence

Markus K Diener et al. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2011 Jan.

Erratum in

  • Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2011 Jun;396(5):727. Mehr, Keyvan-Tadjalli [corrected to Tadjalli-Mehr, Keyvan]

Abstract

Background: This systematic review aims to analyse the risk-benefit association of (1) prophylactic drains and/or (2) the time of their removal after pancreatic resection.

Materials and methods: A systematic literature search (Medline, Embase, Biosis, and The Cochrane Library) was performed to identify all types of controlled trials comparing the role of drainage or the time of their removal on postoperative complications following pancreatic surgery. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

Results: Four studies, two randomised trials and two prospective cohort studies, were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Removal of drains at day 5 or later did not show an influence on mortality, morbidity, re-intervention or hospital stay compared to no insertion of drains. Early (day 3-4) compared to late (≥ day 5) drain removal significantly reduced pancreatic fistulas (odds ratio (OR) 0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03-0.32; P = 0.0002), intra-abdominal collections (OR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01-0.67; P = 0.02) and abscesses (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.07-1.00; P = 0.05). Moreover, hospital stay was significantly reduced after early drain removal (mean difference -2.60 days; 95% CI -4.74 to -0.46; P = 0.02)

Conclusion: Further randomised controlled trials are warranted to clarify whether drains are of any use. In case of drain insertion, early removal seems to be superior to late removal.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Control Clin Trials. 1986 Sep;7(3):177-88 - PubMed
    1. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100 - PubMed
    1. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998 Jun;52(6):377-84 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg. 2006 Jul;244(1):1-7 - PubMed
    1. Surgery. 2005 Jul;138(1):8-13 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources