PURPOSE: A prospective, randomized trial was performed to determine if intra-abdominal drainage catheters are necessary after elective liver resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April 1992 and April 1994, 120 patients subjected to liver resection, stratified by extent of resection and by surgeon, were randomized to receive or not receive operative closed-suction drainage. Operative blood loss was not an exclusion criteria, and no patient who consented to the study was excluded. RESULTS:Eighty-seven patients (73%) had resection of one hepatic lobe or more (27 lobectomies, 54 trisegmentectomies, and 6 bilobar atypical resections) and 33 had less than a lobectomy (8 wedge resections or enucleations, 9 segmentectomies, and 16 bisegmentectomies). Eighty-four patients (70%) had metastatic cancer and 36 patients (30%) had primary liver pathology. There were no differences in outcome, including length of hospital stay (no drain, 13.4 +/- 0.9 days; drain, 13.1 +/- 0.8 days; P = not significant [NS]), mortality (no drain, 3.3%; drain, 3.3%), complication rate (no drain, 43%; drain, 48%; P = NS), or requirement for subsequent percutaneous drainage (no drain, 18%; drain, 8%; P = NS). All infected collections (n = 3) occurred in operatively drained patients. Two other complications were directly related to the operatively placed drains. One patient developed a subcutaneous abscess at the drain site, and a second developed a subcutaneous drain tract tumor recurrence as the only current site of recurrence. CONCLUSION: In the first 50 consecutive resections performed since the conclusion of this trial, only 4 patients (8%) have required subsequent percutaneous drainage. We conclude that abdominal drainage is unnecessary after elective liver resection.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: A prospective, randomized trial was performed to determine if intra-abdominal drainage catheters are necessary after elective liver resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April 1992 and April 1994, 120 patients subjected to liver resection, stratified by extent of resection and by surgeon, were randomized to receive or not receive operative closed-suction drainage. Operative blood loss was not an exclusion criteria, and no patient who consented to the study was excluded. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients (73%) had resection of one hepatic lobe or more (27 lobectomies, 54 trisegmentectomies, and 6 bilobar atypical resections) and 33 had less than a lobectomy (8 wedge resections or enucleations, 9 segmentectomies, and 16 bisegmentectomies). Eighty-four patients (70%) had metastatic cancer and 36 patients (30%) had primary liver pathology. There were no differences in outcome, including length of hospital stay (no drain, 13.4 +/- 0.9 days; drain, 13.1 +/- 0.8 days; P = not significant [NS]), mortality (no drain, 3.3%; drain, 3.3%), complication rate (no drain, 43%; drain, 48%; P = NS), or requirement for subsequent percutaneous drainage (no drain, 18%; drain, 8%; P = NS). All infected collections (n = 3) occurred in operatively drained patients. Two other complications were directly related to the operatively placed drains. One patient developed a subcutaneous abscess at the drain site, and a second developed a subcutaneous drain tract tumor recurrence as the only current site of recurrence. CONCLUSION: In the first 50 consecutive resections performed since the conclusion of this trial, only 4 patients (8%) have required subsequent percutaneous drainage. We conclude that abdominal drainage is unnecessary after elective liver resection.
Authors: John E Musser; Melissa Assel; Giuliano B Guglielmetti; Prachee Pathak; Jonathan L Silberstein; Daniel D Sjoberg; Melanie Bernstein; Vincent P Laudone Journal: J Endourol Date: 2014-07-24 Impact factor: 2.942