Literature DB >> 25041265

The role of peri-hepatic drain placement in liver surgery: a prospective analysis.

Jean M Butte1, Jan Grendar, Oliver Bathe, Francis Sutherland, Sean Grondin, Chad G Ball, Elijah Dixon.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The standard use of an intra-operative perihepatic drain (IPD) in liver surgery is controversial and mainly supported by retrospective data. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of IPD in liver surgery.
METHODS: All patients included in a previous, randomized trial were analysed to determine the association between IPD placement, post-operative complications (PC) and treatment. A multivariate analysis identified predictive factors of PC.
RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-nine patients were included in the final analysis of which 114 (57%) had colorectal liver metastases. IPD (n = 87, 44%) was associated with pre-operative biliary instrumentation (P = 0.023), intra-operative bleeding (P < 0.011), Pringle's manoeuver(P < 0.001) and extent of resection (P = 0.001). Seventy-seven (39%) patients had a PC, which was associated with pre-operative biliary instrumentation (P = 0.048), extent of resection (P = 0.002) and a blood transfusion (P = 0.001). Patients with IPD had a higher rate of high-grade PC (25% versus 12%, P = 0.008). Nineteen patients (9.5%) developed a post-operative collection [IPD (n = 10, 11.5%) vs. no drains (n = 9, 8%), P = 0.470]. Seven (8%) patients treated with and 9(8%) without a IPD needed a second drain after surgery, P = 1. Resection of ≥3 segments was the only independent factor associated with PC [odds ratio (OR) = 2, P = 0.025, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-3.7]. DISCUSSION: In spite of preferential IPD use in patients with more complex tumours/resections, IPD did not decrease the rate of PC, collections and the need for a percutaneous post-operative drain. IPD should be reserved for exceptional circumstances in liver surgery.
© 2014 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25041265      PMCID: PMC4238861          DOI: 10.1111/hpb.12310

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HPB (Oxford)        ISSN: 1365-182X            Impact factor:   3.647


  27 in total

1.  Using a 'no drain' policy in 342 laparoscopic hepatectomies: which factors predict failure?

Authors:  Takeaki Ishizawa; Noah B Zuker; Claudius Conrad; Hao-Jan Lei; Oriana Ciacio; Norihiro Kokudo; Brice Gayet
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  The role of abdominal drainage after major hepatic resection.

Authors:  S Bona; A Gavelli; C Huguet
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection.

Authors:  K C Conlon; D Labow; D Leung; A Smith; W Jarnagin; D G Coit; N Merchant; M F Brennan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Hepatectomy without abdominal drainage. Results of a prospective study in 61 patients.

Authors:  D Franco; A Karaa; J L Meakins; G Borgonovo; C Smadja; D Grange
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Abdominal drainage after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Josep Fuster; Josep M Llovet; Juan C Garcia-Valdecasas; Luis Grande; Constantino Fondevila; Ramon Vilana; Jordi Palacin; Jeanine Tabet; Joana Ferrer; Jordi Bruix; Josep Visa
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr

6.  Gastric cancer surgery without drains: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Junuk Kim; Junho Lee; Woo Jin Hyung; Jae Ho Cheong; Jian Chen; Seung Ho Choi; Sung Hoon Noh
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Drainage after elective hepatic resection. A randomized trial.

Authors:  J Belghiti; M Kabbej; A Sauvanet; V Vilgrain; Y Panis; F Fekete
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Drainage is unnecessary after elective liver resection.

Authors:  Y Fong; M F Brennan; K Brown; N Heffernan; L H Blumgart
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Abdominal drainage after hepatic resection is contraindicated in patients with chronic liver diseases.

Authors:  Chi-Leung Liu; Sheung-Tat Fan; Chung-Mau Lo; Yik Wong; Irene Oi-Lin Ng; Chi-Ming Lam; Ronnie Tung-Ping Poon; John Wong
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

Authors:  Daniel Dindo; Nicolas Demartines; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  4 in total

1.  Abandoning Prophylactic Abdominal Drainage after Hepatic Surgery: 10 Years of No-Drain Policy in an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Environment.

Authors:  Edgar M Wong-Lun-Hing; Victor van Woerden; Toine M Lodewick; Marc H A Bemelmans; Steven W M Olde Damink; Cornelis H C Dejong; Ronald M van Dam
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2017-03-25       Impact factor: 2.588

2.  Role of Drain Placement in Major Hepatectomy: A NSQIP Analysis of Procedure-Targeted Hepatectomy Cases.

Authors:  Chaya Shwaartz; Adam C Fields; Jeffrey J Aalberg; Celia M Divino
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: current perspectives.

Authors:  Stefan Buettner; Jeroen LA van Vugt; Jan Nm IJzermans; Bas Groot Koerkamp
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Timing for removing prophylactic drains after liver resection: an evaluation of drain removal on the third and first postoperative days.

Authors:  Akihiko Ichida; Yoshiharu Kono; Masumitsu Sato; Nobuhisa Akamatsu; Junichi Kaneko; Junichi Arita; Yoshihiro Sakamoto; Norihiro Kokudo; Kiyoshi Hasegawa
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-04
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.