The effect of drains in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Simple elective cholecystectomy: to drain or not. A controlled trial of drainage after cholecystectomy. Cholecystectomy is safer without drainage: the results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Drainage after cholecystectomy. A prospective randomized clinical trial. A randomized study of cholecystectomy with and without drainage. Cholecystectomy with and without drainage: a prospective randomised study. Cholecystectomy with and without drainage. A randomized, prospective study of 300 patients. Abdominal drainage following cholecystectomy: high, low, or no suction? Influence of intraperitoneal drainage after cholecystectomy; a prospective ultrasonographic study. Suction drainage of the gallbladder bed does not prevent complications after cholecystectomy: a random control clinical trial. Randomized trial of drainage after cholecystectomy. Suction vaersus static drainage through a main wound versus a stab incision. Effect of drainage on postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomised prospective trial of two drainage methods after cholecystectomy. Passive tube and suction drainage after elective cholecystectomy--a comparison using ultrasonography. A randomised comparison of three drainage systems following cholecystectomy. A comparison of two types of vacuum drainage after cholecystectomy. Closed-suction versus Penrose drainage after cholecystectomy. A prospective, randomized evaluation. [Routine drainage following uncomplicated, elective cholecystectomy? A prospective, randomized study]. Elective cholecystectomy without drainage and without prophylactic antibiotics. A prospective randomized trial with clinical and bacteriological aspects. [Elective cholecystectomy with and without subhepatic drainage. A controlled, prospective study]. A prospective randomized study of drained and undrained cholecystectomies. [The "ideal" cholecystectomy. A prospective, randomized study]. A simple and effective way to reduce postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Effects of open vs. laparoscopic cholecystectomy on oxidative stress. Gastric cancer surgery without drains: a prospective randomized trial.
A prospective controlled randomized study was performed on 100 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy to evaluate the benefit of routine drainage in simple uncomplicated procedures. The 100 patients were randomized into two groups. Group 1 patients (n = 50) had a drain placed through the epigastric trocar site. The drain was removed before their discharge unless bile or blood was present. Group 2 patients (n = 50) did not have a drain placed. Eleven patients in group 2 (no drain) (22%) were discharged on the same day of surgery (within 8 h), and the remaining 89 patients in both groups were discharged the day after surgery (within 23 h). There were no wound infections or postoperative fever in either group. There were minor but not statistically significant differences between the two groups in postoperative severity and duration of abdominal pain, shoulder pain, and nausea. Furthermore, the two groups were similar in respect to postoperative recovery time and return to work. We performed a large single-center prospective randomized controlled study to assess the role of peritoneal drainage in simple elective cholecystectomy. In 248 patients, drains were omitted; 122 patients had closed suction drains and 124 had Penrose drains. There were no deaths, and no patient required reoperation or drainage of a subhepatic collection. Wound infections occurred in eight patients with drains and in six patients without. Most infections were staphylococcal. Postoperative pulmonary complications and hospital stays were similar in patients with and without drains. Statistical analysis of the 10 available prospective controlled randomized studies (1,920 patients) by the method of odds ratios supported our findings. Simple elective cholecystectomy is safe without peritoneal drainage, but short-term drains do not increase morbidity. A prospective controlled trial of drainage after cholecystectomy has been carried out. In a consecutive series of 143 patients undergoing cholecystectomy, 50 patients were randomly allocated to a drainage group and a further 50 patients to a non-drainage group. The remaining 43 patients were drained electively because the common bile duct was explored or because of infection or incomplete haemostasis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of wound infection or other complications between the drainage and the non-drainage groups. The duration of postoperative pyrexia, the number of analgesic injections and the length of postoperative hospital stay were the same in both the randomized groups. One patient in the randomized drainage group had a reactionary haemorrhage from the drain site requiring transfusion. There was no mortality but one patient in the elective drainage group had to be re-explored for a subhepatic abscess. Three patients in this group drained bile from the drain for 3-9 days but all had a T tube in place. This trial fails to demonstrate any advantage or disadvantage in draining the gallbladder bed after cholecystectomy. Drainage after cholecystectomy remains routine despite the lack of scientific supportive data. Numerous clinical studies in the past have attempted to address this controversy but have failed to resolve the issue for different reasons. These include retrospective design, inclusion of only selected cases, and randomization before surgery. In this study 479 patients undergoing cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to a drainage group (a high-pressure suction drain in Morison's pouch for 48 hours) or a nondrainage group. Randomization was performed at the time of peritoneal closure. All patients undergoing cholecystectomy, both elective and urgent, were included and the operations were performed by all grades of surgeons. There were two deaths from cardiopulmonary causes, both in the drainage group. No patient required reoperation in either group. The incidence of both wound infections (15 vs 5; p less than 0.05) and chest infections (56 vs 19, p less than 0.02) was significantly higher in the drainage group. Three hundred fifty-six patients underwent abdominal ultrasonography 72 hours after surgery. The number of subhepatic fluid collections thus detected was significantly higher in the patients who received a drain (17 vs 6, p less than 0.05). None of these collections was clinically significant. The postoperative hospital stay was longer in the patients with drains (10.3 vs 9.1 days), but this difference failed to reach statistical significance. We conclude from this study that the use of a drain after cholecystectomy serves no useful purpose and is potentially harmful. This practice should be abandoned. This prospective clinical study was done to assess the efficacy of postcholecystectomy drainage. A total of 173 cholecystectomized patients were randomized into two groups; group A (86 patients) without drainage and group B (87 patients) with drainage. Group B included two types of patients; B1 (52 patients) with suction drain and B2 (35 patients) with gravity drain. Evidence of wound infection, chest complications, and duration of hospital stay were recorded in every case. Ninety five patients were assessed for chest complications and subhepatic collection by chest x-ray and abdominal ultrasonography. In group B patients the total amount of fluid drained was measured. The results were analysed by appropriate statistical methods. There was no significant difference in the rate of wound infection or atelectasis in either group, although there was apparent increase of lung complications and subhepatic collections in Group B1. The average postoperative hospital stay was significantly increased in group B patients. Considering all the parameters of this study, it was found that drainage with gravity was attended with the least morbidity. Routine drainage of the bed of the gallbladder following cholecystectomy remains controversial. A prospectively randomized series of 100 instances of cholecystectomy for chronic and subsiding acute cholecystitis are reviewed. Postoperative fever was lowered, the need for dressing changes was virtually eliminated and hospital stay was shortened in patients who did not undergo drainage. No complications attributable to drain avoidance were seen. The use of subhepatic intraperitoneal drains was prospectively studied in 100 patients who underwent elective cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. These patients were randomised to have subhepatic drains (group A, n = 50 patients) or to have no drains (group B, n = 50 patients). There was no difference in the age or sex composition of the two groups. The patients were followed in the post-operative period (0-7 days) for evidence of fever, wound infection, septicaemia and any evidence of intra-peritoneal bile leakage. Also post operative hospital stay of patients was noted. In group A, 14 patients (28%) developed spikes of temperature of 38 degrees C or more while only 5 patients (10%) in group B developed such episodes. The difference was statistically significant between the two groups (P < 0.05). Wound infection occurred significantly more (P < 0.05) in group A (in 15 patients) as compared to group B (in 5 patients). Septicaemia occurred in 2 patients in group A and in none in group B. There was no evidence of intraperitoneal bile leakage in either group. Patients in group A tended to have longer post operative hospital stay (mean of 10.2 days) than patients in group B (mean 8.7 days); but the difference between the two groups in this respect was not significant. We conclude that subhepatic intra-peritoneal drains offered no additional advantage in elective cholecystectomy. The evidence we had pointed to their harmful effects. A randomized, prospective study of 300 cholecystectomies was undertaken to evaluate the merits of drainage through a standard Penrose or Chaffin-Pratt sump tube matched against no drainage at all. There was no difference in mortality or length of hospital stay. There was, however, a significantly higher incidence of postoperative pyrexia due to atelectasis and wound infection in the drainage groups. Neither drain fulfilled its objective of providing outflow for a subhepatic collection, thus avoiding bile peritonitis. This study suggests that surgical drainage after every uncomplicated cholecystectomy is unnecessary and unwise. A prospective trial to assess the effect of suction in an abdominal drain following cholecystectomy was carried out. Three types of closed drainage system were compared: a simple tube drain, a low negative pressure drain, and a high negative pressure drain: 120 consecutive patients undergoing cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to one of the three drainage groups. There was no significant difference in postoperative pyrexia, wound infection, chest infection, or hospital stay. This study failed to demonstrate any clinically useful difference between high negative pressure, low negative pressure, and static drainage system were compared: a simple tube drain, a low negative used, suction is not necessary and a simple tube drain (greater than 6 mm internal diameter) is the most effective form of drainage. One hundred and fifty patients were prospectively randomised into 3 groups (50 in each group); to receive a passive drain, closed suction drain or no drain after elective cholecystectomy. The drain was removed within 24 hours in 84% of patients and was continued longer only if the amount of drainage was excessive or bilious. On the 3rd post-operative day, an ultrasound examination was performed in all patients for detection of subhepatic/subphrenic collection. Collections were more frequently encountered in the patients without any drain (42%) followed by passive drain (26%) and suction drain group (20%). Chest complications were frequently noted (passive drain; 6% suction drain, 12%, and no drain, 8%), however, occurrence of this complication in various groups was similar (p > 0.1). Two patients (4%) without drain required ultrasound guided aspiration of subhepatic collection. Mean post-operative hospital stay was nearly equal for all the groups (passive drain: 4.22 +/- 1 days, suction drain: 4.26 +/- 1.4 days and no drain: 4.62 +/- 2.3 days). Drainage reduced the incidence of post-cholecystectomy collections and need for invasive intervention for collection related complications. However, the type of drainage (active or passive) did not influence the incidence of collection, frequency of complications and duration of post-operative hospital stay. Some surgeons drain the gallbladder bed routinely, some selectively and some not at all. We aimed to clarify this confusion by entering 155 consecutive patients undergoing emergency and elective cholecystectomy without exploration of the common bile duct into a random control clinical trial. In 78 patients a 3 mm suction drain was left in the gallbladder bed and in 77 the abdomen was closed without drainage. There were no withdrawals, one death (in the drainage group) from myocardial infarction and one intraperitoneal abscess complicating postoperative pancreatitis (in the no-drainage group). Other events studied were postoperative pyrexia, wound infection, respiratory tract infection and duration of hospital stay. In none of these did the two groups differ either clinically or statistically. We conclude that drainage or non-drainage of the gallbladder bed must remain a matter of individual preference. One hundred eighty-four patients who underwent biliary surgery were randomly allocated to four groups arranaed in a 2 by 2 design. In 92 patients the drain was brought out through the wound and in the other 92 through a stab incision. In half of the patients in each group the drain was connected to a suction system and in the other half to a sterile bag. Suction was found to impair rather than enhance intraperitoneal drainage. In patients who underwent elective cholecystectomy and early operation for acute cholecystitis, the amount of discharge was more than twice as large when suction was omitted than when it was applied. After common duct operations the amount of discharge was very large and there was little difference in cases with and without suction. Prolonged drainage, static or suction, resulted in an increase in the serum haptoglobin level. Analysis of out data suggested that after a few days the drain starts to act as a traumatic stimulus. No difference was found between cases with the drain brought out through a stab incision and those with the drain brought out through the main wound. A number of studies have ascertained the superiority of closed to open drainage. The results of the present trial lead us to recommend that after biliary surgery the closed us to recommend that after biliary surgery the closed drain should not be connected to a suction apparatus and that after elective cholecystectomy the drain should preferably be removed after a few days. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting. Pneumoperitoneum created during the operation and residual gas after the operation are two of the factors in postoperative pain and nausea. We studied the effects of a subdiaphragmatic gas drain, which is intended to decrease the residual gas, on postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Seventy patients were randomized into two demographically and clinically comparable groups: drainage and control. Postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting were measured by verbal grading and visual analog scale 2-72 h postoperatively. Analgesic and antiemetic use and incidence of retching, vomiting and other complaints were also recorded.
                Subdiaphragmatic drain effectively reduced the incidence and amount of subdiaphragmatic gas bubble. The incidence and severity of nausea was lower in the drainage group at 72 h. Although severity of pain was lower at 8 and 12 h in the drainage group, the difference was not significant. There was also no difference between the groups in regard to analgesic and antiemetic use.
                Subdiaphragmatic drain offers only minor, if any, benefit on postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and this effect is probably clinically irrelevant. A prospective trial is described in which simple tube drainage was compared with suction drainage after cholecystectomy. Postoperative chest infection and infected or painful drain wounds were both significantly more common with simple tube drains. Postoperative discomfort was more frequent with tube drains in situ and wound infection more common in the suction group, but neither of these differences was statistically significant. The mean volume of fluid drained and duration of hospital stay did not differ between methods. It is concluded that both methods are satisfactory, but suction drainage is recommended. Daily ultrasonography of the gallbladder bed was performed in patients with suction or passive tube drains after elective cholecystectomy. A total of 19 patients was randomized to suction drainage and 17 to passive tube drainage. A policy of early drain removal was followed. No significant difference was found between the volume drained and the size of collection detected in either group. Significant bile leaks were detected and were adequately drained by suction and passive tube drains. There were no complications from drains. In view of these findings, we advocate short-term drainage of the gallbladder bed after both open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the drain of the surgeon's choice. The efficacy of low pressure, high pressure and passive drainage systems have been compared after cholecystectomy. Symptoms of pain, discomfort and nausea were compared using linear analogue scales and spirometry was used to examine pre-operative and postoperative respiratory function. The low pressure suction drain removed an intraperitoneal marker, gentamicin, more effectively than the high pressure suction drain, but not more effectively than the passive drain. There were no differences in postoperative respiratory function nor in the amount of pain or discomfort between the groups. The passive drain group reported less nausea than the suction drain groups. If a negative pressure drainage system is to be used, a low pressure suction drain should be used in preference to a high pressure system. Following cholecystectomy, 50 patients were randomly allocated for suction drainage by small (2.5 mm) Redivac or large calibre (6 mm) Redivac drains. There were 25 patients in each group. Subhepatic collection was detected by ultrasonic examination in 5 patients on the seventh postoperative day. The smaller drain was used in all of these patients. Of these 5 patients, one developed pulmonary infection, a second had internal bleeding requiring laparotomy, while the remaining 3 were asymptomatic. Subhepatic fluid was not detected in any patient who had the larger drain. Closed-suction drainage was compared prospectively to open, passive drainage (Penrose drains) in 128 patients undergoing cholecystectomy. Patients were randomized at the time of operation to receive either closed-suction drains (Group I, 67 patients) or Penrose drains (Group II, 61 patients). The preoperative clinical parameters of the two groups were similar. The patients in Group I when compared with those in Group II had a shorter duration of drainage (3.3 days and 4.1 days, respectively, p less than 0.01), a lesser volume of drainage in the first 48 hours postoperatively (78 ml and 132 ml, respectively, p less than 0.001), a decreased incidence of fever on the night of operation (24 of 67 patients and 39 of 61 patients, respectively, p less than 0.05) and on the first postoperative day (26 of 67 patients and 32 of 61 patients, respectively, p less than 0.05), and a lower leukocyte count on the first postoperative day (12,000 cells/mm3 and 14,100 cells/mm3, respectively, 0.05 less than p less than 0.1). Patients in Group I tended to have a lower rate of wound infection (1 of 67 patients versus 5 of 61 patients in Group II, 0.05 less than p less than 0.1) and had a much lower incidence of drain site tenderness (8 of 67 patients in Group I versus 24 of 61 patients in Group II, p less than 0.05). This study demonstrates the superiority of closed-suction drains over open, passive drains after cholecystectomy. A prospective randomized and controlled study of prophylactic drainage after simple, elective cholecystectomy was carried out. From March 1988 to June 1991 80 patients received an Easy-Flow drain and 80 did not. Operation and perioperative management were standardized. The endpoint of the study was postoperative morbidity, especially postoperative pyrexia and subhepatic fluid collection. The latter was identified by ultrasonography performed daily on postoperative day 1-4. No patient died. The morbidity including postoperative pyrexia revealed no difference between drained and undrained patients. In 19 of the patients with (23.8%) and in 25 of the patients without drainage (31.3%) a subhepatic fluid collection could be demonstrated by ultrasonography. This difference was not statistically significant either. We conclude that prophylactic drainage after elective, simple cholecystectomy is of no use for the patient. As subhepatic fluid collections can be seen in drained as well as in undrained patients it has to be accepted that drainage does not guarantee the removal of subhepatic fluid. Therefore its indicatory function (bleeding) and the ability to prevent the patient having biliary peritonitis or local abscess has to be put in doubt. A consecutive series of 50 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy without prophylactic antibiotics entered a prospective randomized trial to compare the post-operative clinical course whether the subhepatic space was drained or not. 26 patients (mean age 58 yrs) were drained and 24 patients (mean age 59 yrs) were not. The incidence of positive gallbladder bile cultures were respectively 8 and 19% (N.S.) in the drained and undrained groups. The incidence of post-operative mortality, thrombo-phlebitis and intra-abdominal sepsis was zero in both groups. In the drained or undrained series, the incidence of wound infection was respectively 4% and 0% (N.S.), that of urinary infection was 8% and 13% (N.S.) and that of pulmonary atelectasis was 15 and 17% (N.S.). A further consecutive series of 100 undrained elective cholecystectomies (18% positive bile cultures) without prophylactic antibiotics was then performed with the same uneventful postoperative course. This study therefore indicates that even in the presence of bacterobilia elective cholecystectomy can be safely performed without subhepatic space drainage and without prophylactic antibiotics. Based on the data of 56 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy the value of subhepatic drainage is evaluated in a randomized controlled clinical trial. The design of the study and the perioperative management of the patients are described in detail and the results analyzed according to clinical course, blood tests and abdominal ultrasound. One hundred twenty-three patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy at USAF Medical Center Keesler were studied in a prospective randomized manner to determine the differences in morbidity and mortality following drained and undrained cholecystectomies. The groups were compared for differences in mortality, wound infection, postoperative fever, and length of hospitalization. One death occurred due to an unrelated cause in an undrained patient. Three per cent of the undrained group developed wound infections as compared to five per cent in the drained group. This was not statistically significant. A significant difference occurred in postoperative fever between the drained (58%) and undrained (30%) groups. Postoperative hospitalization was also significantly shorter in the undrained group. This study suggests that drainage following elective cholecystectomy is not only unnecessary, but may add to postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization. 200 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy were studied in a prospective randomized manner. This study suggests that the nasogastric tube and postoperative iv-infusions are unnecessary. We continue to use a subhepatic drain. Exception: the senior surgeon in a straightforward case. The aims of this study were to see if laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a similar postoperative pain pattern to gynaecological laparoscopy and to see whether the use of a suprahepatic suction drain makes recovery from laparoscopic cholecystectomy more comfortable. After routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy and insertion of a suprahepatic suction drain, patients were randomized to suction or no suction on the drain. The time course of the severity of wound, abdominal and shoulder tip pain was assessed by visual analogue scales administered in the morning and afternoon of the first 3 postoperative days. The control group had a high incidence of shoulder tip pain similar to that after gynaecological laparoscopy. Patients in the treatment group reported significantly less shoulder tip pain than the control group (O.R. 0.16, 95% CI, 0.06-0.40). There was a tendency for the treatment group to report reduced abdominal and, to a lesser extent, wound pain. The authors recommend suprahepatic suction as a simple and more effective way to improve patient comfort after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy is established as the treatment of choice for symptomatic cholecystolithiasis and is now proposed for the treatment of acute cholecystitis. The aim of this study is to evaluate biochemical aspects of open (OC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We measured the levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) and the levels of nitrite+nitrate as stable end products of nitric oxide (NO). MDA and nitrite+nitrate levels were increased at both surgical procedures compared to preoperative period, but the rise was more significant in OC than LC. These results showed that both OC and LC caused an increase in oxidative stress. However LC caused significantly less oxidative stress and the changes during surgery returned to preoperative values after LC in a shorter period. The beneficial effects of laparoscopic surgery may be related, partially, to less oxidative stress in the immediate postoperative period. Prophylactic drain placement during major abdominal surgery has been widely practiced without clear scientific evidence to support it. We hypothesized that prophylactic drain placement is not necessary in gastric cancer surgery. A randomized prospective trial was conducted between February 1, 2001, and July 30, 2001. Patients were randomly assigned to either the drain group or the no-drain group. One hundred seventy patients completed the study by undergoing either subtotal or total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection. Surgical outcome between the two groups was compared within the subtotal and total gastrectomy subgroups. Postoperative complication within 30 days was the primary end point of the study. No significant difference was noted in the incidence of postoperative complication between the drain group and the no-drain group. The results of this study suggest that prophylactic drain placement does not offer additional benefit for patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery with extended lymph node dissection.
Drains increase the harms to the patient without providing any additional benefit for patients undergoing open cholecystectomy and should be avoided in open cholecystectomy.