M J Parker1, C Roberts. 1. Orthopaedic Department, Peterborough District Hospital, Thorpe Road, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, UK, PE3 6DA. mjparker@doctors.org.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Closed suction drainage systems are frequently used to drain fluids, particularly blood, from surgical wounds. The aim of these systems is to reduce the occurrence of wound haematomas and infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of closed suction drainage systems for orthopaedic surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (May 2001), MEDLINE (1996-May 2001) and references from articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing the use of closed suction drainage systems with no drainage systems for all types of elective and emergency orthopaedic surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a nine item scale, and extracted data. Wherever appropriate and possible, the data are presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-one studies involving 2772 patients with 2971 wounds were included in the analysis. The types of surgery involved were hip and knee replacement, shoulder surgery, hip fracture surgery, spinal surgery, cruciate ligament reconstruction, open meniscectomy and fracture fixation surgery. Many of the studies had poor methodology and reporting of outcomes. Pooling of results indicated no difference in the incidence of wound infection, haematoma or dehiscence between those allocated to drains and the un-drained wounds. There was a tendency to an increased risk of re-operation for wound complications in the group with drains (relative risk (RR) 2.25, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.95 to 5.33), but due to the small numbers of cases involved definite conclusions cannot be made for this outcome. Blood transfusion was required more frequently in those who received drains (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.80). The need for reinforcement of wound dressings (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.40) and bruising around the operation site was more common in the group without drains. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the routine use of closed suction drainage in orthopaedic surgery. Further randomised trials are required before definite conclusions can be made.
BACKGROUND: Closed suction drainage systems are frequently used to drain fluids, particularly blood, from surgical wounds. The aim of these systems is to reduce the occurrence of wound haematomas and infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of closed suction drainage systems for orthopaedic surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (May 2001), MEDLINE (1996-May 2001) and references from articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing the use of closed suction drainage systems with no drainage systems for all types of elective and emergency orthopaedic surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers independently assessed trial quality, using a nine item scale, and extracted data. Wherever appropriate and possible, the data are presented graphically. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-one studies involving 2772 patients with 2971 wounds were included in the analysis. The types of surgery involved were hip and knee replacement, shoulder surgery, hip fracture surgery, spinal surgery, cruciate ligament reconstruction, open meniscectomy and fracture fixation surgery. Many of the studies had poor methodology and reporting of outcomes. Pooling of results indicated no difference in the incidence of wound infection, haematoma or dehiscence between those allocated to drains and the un-drained wounds. There was a tendency to an increased risk of re-operation for wound complications in the group with drains (relative risk (RR) 2.25, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.95 to 5.33), but due to the small numbers of cases involved definite conclusions cannot be made for this outcome. Blood transfusion was required more frequently in those who received drains (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.80). The need for reinforcement of wound dressings (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.40) and bruising around the operation site was more common in the group without drains. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the routine use of closed suction drainage in orthopaedic surgery. Further randomised trials are required before definite conclusions can be made.
Authors: Lauren A Beaupre; C Allyson Jones; L Duncan Saunders; D William C Johnston; Jeanette Buckingham; Sumit R Majumdar Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 5.128