Literature DB >> 27344569

Is a drain tube necessary for minimally invasive lumbar spine fusion surgery?

Pei-I Hung1,2,3, Ming-Chau Chang1,2, Po-Hsin Chou1,2, Hsi-Hsien Lin4,5, Shih-Tien Wang1,2, Chien-Lin Liu1,2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate if closed suction wound drainage is necessary in minimally invasive surgery of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF).
METHODS: This is a prospective randomized clinical study. Fifty-six patients who underwent MIS TLIF were randomly divided into groups A (with a closed suction wound drainage) and B (without tube drainage). Surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss, timing of ambulation, length of hospital stay and complications were recorded. Patients were followed up for an average of 25.3 months. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Oswestry disability index and visual analogue scale (VAS). Fusion rate was classified with the Bridwell grading system, based on plain radiograph.
RESULTS: Both groups had similar patient demographics. The use of drains had no significant influence on perioperative parameters including operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay and complications. Patients in group B started ambulation 1 day earlier than patients in group A (p < 0.001). Clinical outcomes were comparable between group A and group B.
CONCLUSION: A drain tube can lead to pain, anxiety and discomfort during the postoperative period. We conclude that drain tubes are not necessary for MIS TLIF. Patients without drains had the benefit of earlier ambulation than those with drains.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Drain tube; Epidural haematoma; Infection; MIS TLIF; Minimally invasive surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27344569     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-016-4672-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  24 in total

1.  To drain or not to drain: about using wound drainage after instrumented spine procedures.

Authors:  Andrè Tomasino; Christianto B Lumenta
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 2.104

2.  Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in the National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database for Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Jian Guan; Erica F Bisson; Andrew T Dailey; Robert S Hood; Meic H Schmidt
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  The Long-term Clinical Effect of Minimal-Invasive TLIF Technique in 1-Segment Lumbar Disease.

Authors:  Yi-Bing Li; Xiao-Dong Wang; Hong-Wei Yan; Ding-Jun Hao; Zheng-Hua Liu
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.876

4.  Use of closed suction devices and other drains in spinal surgery: results of an online, Germany-wide questionnaire.

Authors:  Kajetan L von Eckardstein; Jaqueline E Dohmes; Veit Rohde
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-08       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Closed suction surgical wound drainage after orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  M J Parker; C Roberts
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2001

6.  Short-term and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: is there a difference?

Authors:  Jason S Cheng; Priscilla Park; Hai Le; Lori Reisner; Dean Chou; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.047

7.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Kong Hwee Lee; Wai Mun Yue; William Yeo; Henry Soeharno; Seang Beng Tan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Is closed-suction drainage necessary for single-level lumbar decompression?: review of 560 cases.

Authors:  Masahiro Kanayama; Fumihiro Oha; Daisuke Togawa; Keiichi Shigenobu; Tomoyuki Hashimoto
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Chan Wearn Benedict Peng; Wai Mun Yue; Seng Yew Poh; William Yeo; Seang Beng Tan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  The Outcome of Using Closed Suction Wound Drains in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Feras Waly; Mohammad M Alzahrani; Fahad H Abduljabbar; Tara Landry; Jean Ouellet; Kathryn Moran; Joseph R Dettori
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-12
View more
  9 in total

1.  Differences in the interbody bone graft area and fusion rate between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective short-term image analysis.

Authors:  Yu-Cheng Yao; Hsi-Hsien Lin; Po-Hsin Chou; Shih-Tien Wang; Ming-Chau Chang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-06-07       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Generalizing the results: how can we improve our reports?

Authors:  Mikhail Saltychev; Merja Eskola
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Incidence of postoperative symptomatic spinal epidural hematoma requiring surgical evacuation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qian Chen; Xiaoxin Zhong; Wenzhou Liu; Chipiu Wong; Qing He; Yantao Chen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 2.721

4.  Lumbar surgical drains do not increase the risk of infections in patients undergoing spine surgery.

Authors:  Zorica Buser; Ki-Eun Chang; Ronald Kall; Blake Formanek; Anush Arakelyan; Sarah Pak; Betsy Schafer; John C Liu; Jeffrey C Wang; Patrick Hsieh; Thomas C Chen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 2.721

5.  Post-operative drain use in patients undergoing decompression and fusion: incidence of complications and symptomatic hematoma.

Authors:  Owoicho Adogwa; Aladine A Elsamadicy; Amanda R Sergesketter; Ronnie L Shammas; Sohrab Vatsia; Victoria D Vuong; Syed Khalid; Joseph Cheng; Carlos A Bagley; Isaac O Karikari
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-06

6.  Defining the MIS-TLIF: A Systematic Review of Techniques and Technologies Used by Surgeons Worldwide.

Authors:  Sara Lener; Christoph Wipplinger; R Nick Hernandez; Ibrahim Hussain; Sertac Kirnaz; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Franziska Anna Schmidt; Eliana Kim; Roger Härtl
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-05-28

7.  Intraoperative anti-inflammatory drugs combined with no drainage after MIS-TLIF in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation: an RCT.

Authors:  Jinpeng Du; Junsong Yang; Liang Yan; Lequn Shan; Wentao Wang; Yong Fan; Dingjun Hao; Dageng Huang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 2.359

8.  Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Effect of MIS-TLF Surgery in the Treatment of Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Orthopaedic Spine.

Authors:  Wanliang Yang; Xin Pan; Xun Xiao
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-16

9.  Clinical and Radiographic Comparison Between Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Bilateral Facetectomies.

Authors:  Hai Le; Ryan Anderson; Eileen Phan; Joseph Wick; Joshua Barber; Rolando Roberto; Eric Klineberg; Yashar Javidan
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-06-22
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.