Literature DB >> 30069511

The use of subfascial drains after multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: does the data support its use?

Owoicho Adogwa1, Syed I Khalid1, Aladine A Elsamadicy2, Victoria D Voung1, Daniel T Lilly1, Shyam A Desai1, Amanda R Sergesketter2, Joseph Cheng3, Isaac O Karikari2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Subfascial drains are routinely used after multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures despite little evidence to support their use. Proponents of drain use argue that drain placement reduces the incidence of post-operative hematomas and surgical site infections (SSI). The aim of this study is to determine whether the use of subfascial drains after multi-level ACDFs are associated with a decreased incidence of hematomas and SSIs.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 321 consecutive adult patients (18 years and older) with degenerative cervical stenosis that undergoing an index multi-level ACDF procedure. Only patients undergoing multilevel ACDF were included in the study. Patients were separated into one of two groups depending whether a subfascial drain was placed during surgery. The decision to place a drain was based on surgeon preference. Baseline characteristics, operative details, as well as rates of hematoma formation and SSIs were gathered by direct medical record review.
RESULTS: Of the 321 patients enrolled in the study, 58 (18%) patients had subfascial drains placed at the time of surgery. Baseline demographics and co-morbidities were similar between both cohorts; however, on average, patients in the "Drain Use" cohort were older when compared to those in the "No Drain" cohort (64 vs. 56 years old, P<0.0001). There was no observed difference between both groups in the incidence of post-operative hematoma formation (P=0.99) or SSI (P=0.99). Five percent of patients in the "Drain Use" cohort required a post-operative allogenic blood transfusion compared to less than 1% (0.4%) in the comparison cohort. The duration of hospital stay was almost 2-fold longer in the in the "Drain use" cohort compared to the comparison cohort ("Drain Use": 2.82 days vs. "No Drain": 1.58 days, P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of subfascial drains after multi-level ACDF procedures were not associated with a decreased incidence of hematoma formation or SSIs. In fact, patients in which a subfascial drain was used were 14 times more likely to require a post-operative blood transfusion and with an almost 2-fold increase in the duration of in-hospital stay.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Subfascial drains; multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)

Year:  2018        PMID: 30069511      PMCID: PMC6046311          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2018.05.10

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  23 in total

1.  Why use drains?

Authors:  J P Cobb
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1990-11

2.  Efficacy of closed wound suction drainage after single-level lumbar laminectomy.

Authors:  D H Payne; J S Fischgrund; H N Herkowitz; R L Barry; L T Kurz; D M Montgomery
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1996-10

3.  The use of postoperative suction drainage in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  T J Reilly; I A Gradisar; W Pakan; M Reilly
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Cervical haematoma after thyroid surgery: management and prevention.

Authors:  M Shandilya; S Kieran; P Walshe; C Timon
Journal:  Ir Med J       Date:  2006-10

5.  Closed wound drainage in total hip or total knee replacement. A prospective, randomized study.

Authors:  M A Ritter; E M Keating; P M Faris
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  The efficacy of suction drains after routine total joint arthroplasty.

Authors:  K J Beer; A V Lombardi; T H Mallory; B K Vaughn
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Factors predictive of increased surgical drain output after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Bryce A Basques; Daniel D Bohl; Nicholas S Golinvaux; Alem Yacob; Arya G Varthi; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-04-20       Impact factor: 3.468

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

Review 9.  Do we really need closed-suction drainage in total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xin-die Zhou; Jin Li; Yan Xiong; Li-feng Jiang; Wei-jun Li; Li-dong Wu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 3.075

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
  1 in total

Review 1.  Drains in Spine Surgery for Degenerative Disc Diseases: A Literature Review to Determine Its Usage.

Authors:  Louis Reier; James B Fowler; Mohammad Arshad; Javed Siddiqi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-03-13
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.