Filippo Migliorini1, Nicola Maffulli2, Marcel Betsch3, Jörg Eschweiler4, Markus Tingart5, Alice Baroncini6. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, University Clinic Aachen, RWTH Aachen University Clinic, Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: Migliorini.md@gmail.com. 2. Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Salerno, Via S. Allende, 84081 Baronissi, SA, Italy; School of Pharmacy and Bioengineering, Keele University School of Medicine, Thornburrow Drive, Stoke on Trent, England, UK; Queen Mary University of London, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Centre for Sports and Exercise Medicine, Mile End Hospital, 275 Bancroft Road, London, E1 4DG, England, UK. Electronic address: n.maffulli@qmul.ac.uk. 3. University of Toronto Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Program (UTOSM), Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: marcel.betsch@gmx.de. 4. Department of Orthopaedics, University Clinic Aachen, RWTH Aachen University Clinic, Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: joeschweiler@ukaachen.de. 5. Department of Orthopaedics, University Clinic Aachen, RWTH Aachen University Clinic, Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: mtingart@ukaachen.de. 6. Department of Orthopaedics, University Clinic Aachen, RWTH Aachen University Clinic, Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: alice.baroncini@gmail.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The role of closed suction drainage during elective total joint arthroplasty is still unclear. The present study compared the use of closed suction drains to no drainage for elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and in total hip arthroplasty (THA) through a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials identified in December 2021. All randomized clinical trials comparing the use of closed suction drains to no drainage for elective THA or TKA were considered. RESULTS: Twenty-five RCTs were included in the final analysis. 49% (1722 of 3505) of patients received no-drainage, and 51% (1783 of 3505) received closed suction drainage. There was no evidence of a statistically significant evidence between the two groups in occurrence of postoperative infections (P = 0.4), mean total postoperative hemoglobin (P = 0.2) or length of hospital stay (P = 0.1). The no-drainage group showed a lower rate of blood transfusion (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to support the routine use of closed suction drainage in THA or TKA patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
INTRODUCTION: The role of closed suction drainage during elective total joint arthroplasty is still unclear. The present study compared the use of closed suction drains to no drainage for elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and in total hip arthroplasty (THA) through a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials identified in December 2021. All randomized clinical trials comparing the use of closed suction drains to no drainage for elective THA or TKA were considered. RESULTS: Twenty-five RCTs were included in the final analysis. 49% (1722 of 3505) of patients received no-drainage, and 51% (1783 of 3505) received closed suction drainage. There was no evidence of a statistically significant evidence between the two groups in occurrence of postoperative infections (P = 0.4), mean total postoperative hemoglobin (P = 0.2) or length of hospital stay (P = 0.1). The no-drainage group showed a lower rate of blood transfusion (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to support the routine use of closed suction drainage in THA or TKA patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.