Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25027980›Full record

SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2015

The use of postoperative suction drainage in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Mark Quinn, Andrea Bowe, Rose Galvin, Peter Dawson, John O'Byrne

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mark QuinnProfessorial Unit, National Orthopaedic Hospital, Cappagh, Finglas, Dublin 11, Republic of Ireland.
Andrea Bowe
Rose Galvin
Peter Dawson
John O'Byrne
Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials is to assess the effectiveness of no drainage when compared to drainage in total knee arthroplasty, in terms of recovery of knee flexion, reduction in swelling, length of hospital stay and haemoglobin levels following TKA.

methodsSix randomised controlled trials were included.

resultsThere is no significant difference between the individuals who receive a drain and those who do not across any of the measures examined (p < 0.05). This analysis demonstrates no statistical difference in ROM [mean difference 0.03° (95 %CI -1.51 to 1.45, p = 0.64, I(2) = 0 %)]. , nor in knee circumference [mean difference 1.63 cm (95 % CI -1.07 - 4.34 cm, p = 0.34), [I(2) = 0.12].

conclusionThe finding raises the possibility that drains are not required to assist in recovery following TKA.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDrainageFemaleHumansKnee JointLength of StayMaleOsteoarthritis, KneePostoperative PeriodRecovery of FunctionSuctionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25027980
OpenAlexW1980141323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.